Skip to content

Allow more granular control over the ApplicationMaxBufferSize #5299

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

Closed
davidfowl opened this issue May 19, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

Allow more granular control over the ApplicationMaxBufferSize #5299

davidfowl opened this issue May 19, 2018 · 4 comments
Labels
area-signalr Includes: SignalR clients and servers enhancement This issue represents an ask for new feature or an enhancement to an existing one
Milestone

Comments

@davidfowl
Copy link
Member

Today the ApplicationMaxBufferSize is a single setting per server, we should consider a callback model where this can be configured per connection. That would give more control over which connections get to buffer more incoming data than other connections.

We could also consider 2 limits:

  • Anonymous users and Authenticated users

The default limits are there to protect against unauthenticated users from blowing up server buffers but if users are authenticated the limits might be purely driven by your application. Also, since users are authenticated you have a way to audit and disallow misbehaving users.

Related to aspnet/SignalR#2266

@analogrelay
Copy link
Contributor

Seems reasonable. I wonder if we want to give full control of the PipeOptions to this callback

@davidfowl
Copy link
Member Author

No I don’t want us to expose that type.

@aspnet-hello aspnet-hello transferred this issue from aspnet/SignalR Dec 17, 2018
@aspnet-hello aspnet-hello added this to the 3.0.0 milestone Dec 17, 2018
@aspnet-hello aspnet-hello added area-signalr Includes: SignalR clients and servers cost: S labels Dec 17, 2018
@analogrelay analogrelay added release-3.0 enhancement This issue represents an ask for new feature or an enhancement to an existing one and removed type: Enhancement labels Mar 21, 2019
@analogrelay
Copy link
Contributor

This isn't really relevant after #8223

@davidfowl
Copy link
Member Author

Well it is but we already handled it in SignalR with my latest change

@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 4, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
area-signalr Includes: SignalR clients and servers enhancement This issue represents an ask for new feature or an enhancement to an existing one
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants