Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Http2 master6 v1 #6448

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor

Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/4067

Describe changes:

  • Cherry-pick all latest HTTP2 commits from master to master-6.0.x, except the range one

HTTP1 uses Host, but HTTP2 uses rather :authority cf HPACK

(cherry picked from commit 75f75e1)
As well as http.header.raw

(cherry picked from commit 0b0649d)
so as not to forget continuation and push promise
when iterating over headers

(cherry picked from commit e3ff0e7)
For detection, as is done with HTTP1

(cherry picked from commit 48ed874)
(cherry picked from commit 596a4a9)
so that borrow check gets happy

(cherry picked from commit 56fae07)
@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

===> tcp-protodetect-bailout: FAILED: got exit code -6, expected 0

@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

Are there SV tests that need to be adjusted to actually execute the backported code?

@suricata-qa
Copy link

WARNING:

field test baseline %
tlpr1_stats_chk
.flow.mgr.flows_timeout_inuse 0 1248 0.0%
.flow.spare 6215339 6942743 89.52%
.flow.memuse 1156123648 1295845568 89.22%

Pipeline 4457

@catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor Author

I also get the fail S-V test with master-6.0.x

Should we change the S-V test to have min-version 7 ?

One commit fixing it is f77b027 and also 7a114e5 which are quite complex changes

And this is just a debug assertion...

@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

I also get the fail S-V test with master-6.0.x

Should we change the S-V test to have min-version 7 ?

One commit fixing it is f77b027 and also 7a114e5 which are quite complex changes

And this is just a debug assertion...

Pretty sure those commits are backported to 6...

@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

Maybe these were merged after this PR though.

@catenacyber catenacyber mentioned this pull request Oct 6, 2021
@catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor Author

Maybe these were merged after this PR though.

Indeed, they were merged in between...

Replaced by #6453

@catenacyber catenacyber closed this Oct 6, 2021
catenacyber added a commit to catenacyber/suricata that referenced this pull request Nov 8, 2023
open-cmi pushed a commit to open-cmi/suricata that referenced this pull request Nov 8, 2023
open-cmi pushed a commit to open-cmi/suricata that referenced this pull request Nov 8, 2023
open-cmi pushed a commit to open-cmi/suricata that referenced this pull request Nov 8, 2023
open-cmi pushed a commit to open-cmi/suricata that referenced this pull request Nov 9, 2023
open-cmi pushed a commit to open-cmi/suricata that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2023
victorjulien pushed a commit to victorjulien/suricata that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants