Re: GOAWAY and proxies (#458)

I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether or not we should add a protocol
solution for draining, or if application level health checking is
sufficient. For reverse proxies, an application specific solution may be
sufficient, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on it. There are also the
considerations for forward proxies and other clients (browsers), and it'd
be interesting to hear your (and others) thoughts there.


On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote:

> FWIW: We do out-of-band, active health-checking to signal draining.
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Daniel Sommermann <dcsommer@fb.com>wrote:
>
>> Actually, the extra ack GOAWAY only avoids this issue for high RPS proxy
>> <-> server connections. For low RPS connections, the server's hard shutdown
>> timeout would probably fire before all the extra MAX_CONCURRENT_STREAMS are
>> requested, so the same old race condition still applies. Our proxy/server
>> connections are extremely busy, so we haven't noticed this shortcoming of
>> the workaround.
>>
>>
>