trafficserver-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jered Floyd <je...@convivian.com>
Subject Re: ERR_PROXY_DENIED on DELETE requests? (Grafana behind ATS)
Date Fri, 04 Nov 2016 02:21:46 GMT
Bryan, 

Unfortunately, I don't think I know enough about the cache use case to be helpful here; I
use ATS solely as a reverse proxy. 

It appears to me than many RESTful applications make use of the full suite of HTTP verbs.
GET/POST/PUT/DELETE are the CRUD primitives, and need to be proxied from clients to origin
servers unhindered. In the reverse-proxy use case, I don't see how cache modifications can
be an in-band operation, and thus must be relayed to a service endpoint specifically on the
proxy server. How common is it for DELETE requests to be sent to ATS for cache control reasons
by the content owner, versus having items fall out due to expiry or LRU replacement? 

RFC 7231 section 4.3.5 says, "The DELETE method requests that the origin server remove the
association between the target resource and its current functionality," and also "Responses
to the DELETE method are not cacheable. If a DELETE request passes through a cache that has
one or more stored responses for the effective request URI, those stored responses will be
invalidated (see Section 4.4 of [RFC7234] )." 

I haven't gone through it and RFC 7234 in detail, but that seems pretty clear that client
requests should be proxied, and that the cache should be invalidated. (Perhaps only on a 2xx
response?) 

As I said, I don't know how often DELETE is used for operational cache management so this
may not be practical, but it seems to me that blocking certain methods (PUT, DELETE, etc)
is wholly inappropriate in ATS' role as a proxy server. Perhaps someone closer to the game
can comment? (Should this move to the dev list?) 

--Jered 

----- On Nov 3, 2016, at 5:30 PM, Bryan Call <bcall@apache.org> wrote: 

> The problem with not denying it by default is someone can come by and delete
> objects out of the cache. Do you have any ideas on making this better?
> Unfortunately origins like httpd will respond back with 200 responses on the
> DELETE methods by default (using php in my test), so we can’t rely on the
> origins response code to know if/when to delete the cached object. Right now we
> don’t make sure the origin responses back with a 200 response before we delete
> the object from cache. Maybe that should be changed? I am not an expert on
> webdav, so any input would be helpful.

> -Bryan

>> On Nov 2, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Jered Floyd < jered@convivian.com > wrote:

>> Sudheer,

>> Aha!

>> Thank you; that also resolves a long-standing issue I've had with CalDAV entry
>> modification. This is perhaps a questionable default...

>> --Jered

>> ----- On Nov 2, 2016, at 5:44 PM, Sudheer Vinukonda < sudheervinukonda@yahoo.com
>> > wrote:

>>> The default traffic server install blocks DELETE method from anywhere outside
of
>>> the localhost.

>>> You can modify it as needed for your env.

>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/files/ip_allow.config.en.html?highlight=ip_allow#ip-allow-config

>>> Thanks,

>>> Sudheer

>>> From: Jered Floyd < jered@convivian.com >
>>> To: users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 2:37 PM
>>> Subject: ERR_PROXY_DENIED on DELETE requests? (Grafana behind ATS)

>>> Hello fellow ATS users,

>>> I just ran into a bit of a head-scratcher that I bet someone here knows the
>>> answer to.

>>> I recently set up a Grafana install behind ATS 6.2.0, and have found that I
>>> can't delete dashboards, un-star things, or anything else involving the DELETE
>>> verb. When I access the origin server directly there are no problems. When
>>> going through ATS, the operation results in a "403 Access Denied" in the error
>>> popup.

>>> ATS logs show instances like:
>>> 1478122046.588 0 [my client IP] ERR_PROXY_DENIED/403 198 DELETE http://[my
>>> origin server]:3000/api/user/stars/dashboard/2 - DIRECT/- text/html

>>> Why is ATS refusing to proxy these requests?

>>> I'm going to go dig into the source right now but perhaps someone has a quicker
>>> answer?

>>> Thanks,
>>> --Jered

Mime
View raw message