You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Additionally, we have an header x-request-id which seems to have the same or very similar semantic.
There should be at least a proper documentation for both (or all three, if the underscore-version is intentional (and not a typo)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I already started this task with the following Pull Request: #495.
We want to get rid of the x-rp-unique-id header and only use x-rp-unique_id and x-request-id. For the x-request-id header we should set this when no x-rp-unique-id is present in the request. Right now, x-request-id is only read, but newer written.
Note the dash vs. the underscore in the header name.
The one with the underscore probably is a typo - but still both header names occur in various Gateleen source files - often with a fall-back implementation like here:
https://github.com/swisspush/gateleen/blob/v1.1.27/gateleen-routing/src/main/java/org/swisspush/gateleen/routing/StorageForwarder.java#L148-L151
Additionally, we have an header x-request-id which seems to have the same or very similar semantic.
There should be at least a proper documentation for both (or all three, if the underscore-version is intentional (and not a typo)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: