[SignalR] Copy cookies from negotiate to WebSockets (#24572) #26566
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
halter73
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2020
BrennanConroy
added
the
Servicing-consider
|
Hello human! Please make sure you've included the Shiproom Template in a comment or (preferably) the PR description. Also, make sure this PR is not marked as a draft and is ready-to-merge. |
leecow
added
Servicing-approved
|
This is approved for 3.1.10 - @wtgodbe can you merge this when the branch is ready for checkins. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Backport of #24572
Description
When using a loadbalancer with sticky sessions via cookies enabled the .NET client will not properly propagate cookies from the initial negotiate to the WebSocket connection which can result in random 404's when connecting to the server.
Customer Impact
Bug was reported by a customer at #23679 and multiple others have chimed in. On the PR and issue.
There is a possible workaround (#23350 (reply in thread)), but it is very un-obvious and ugly, it also results in an extra network call that shouldn't be needed.
Regression?
No, looks like this has always been there.
Risk
Low