close websocket if proxyReq is closed before upgrade #708
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
should close the client socket with ECONNRESET, but currently is left hanging.
|
Hm, on further testing, this isn't quite sufficient to fix my use case. I'll dig in some more. |
|
Okay, this PR now actually fixes my problem. The key is handling the proxyReq response when |
avoids leaving client sockets open when upstream connections are rejected.
jcrugzz
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 1, 2014
close websocket if proxyReq is closed before upgrade
|
@minrk my only question is if we should do something about the response as well in the case where it is not an upgrade request. |
|
Since the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
avoids leaving client sockets open when upstream connections are rejected before the upgrade event fires.
I'm not 100% sure about the style or logic of the patch, but the added test cases and my own code suggest that it is doing the right thing. Guidance would be appreciated.
closes #624
closes #627