Open gecube opened 1 year ago
Good day Sirs,
I read Rate Limit documentation that is published by the link https://www.getambassador.io/docs/emissary/latest/topics/using/rate-limits/#attaching-labels-to-requests And found that it is completely misleading.
First of all, all keys are described like
generic_key: key: mykey value: myvalue
or
request_headers: header_name: "header-name" key: mykey
If I paste such a value into emissary Mapping manifest:
apiVersion: getambassador.io/v3alpha1 kind: Mapping metadata: name: mapping-my-top-level-domain namespace: emissary spec: ambassador_id: [ "public" ] hostname: my.top.level.domain prefix: /api/v4 rewrite: "" add_request_headers: Site-Enum: value: _HEADER_COM append: False service: service.namespace:8484 labels: emissary: - request_label_group: - request_headers: header_name: "CF-Connecting-IP" key: remote_address - generic_key: key: endpoint value: api_v4
I am getting the next object in the cluster:
apiVersion: getambassador.io/v2 kind: Mapping metadata: name: mapping-my-top-level-domain namespace: emissary spec: add_request_headers: Site-Enum: append: false value: _HEADER_COM ambassador_id: - '--apiVersion-v3alpha1-only--public' host: my.top.level.domain labels: emissary: - request_label_group: - remote_address: header: CF-Connecting-IP - generic_key: api_v4 v3Key: endpoint prefix: /api/v4 rewrite: '' service: 'service.namespace:8484'
Looks very weird. I am stating that values are mangled.
Hi @gecube , can you give us an example of the Mapping yaml you'd expect, so we can better understand how the values seem mangled?
Good day Sirs,
I read Rate Limit documentation that is published by the link https://www.getambassador.io/docs/emissary/latest/topics/using/rate-limits/#attaching-labels-to-requests And found that it is completely misleading.
First of all, all keys are described like
or
If I paste such a value into emissary Mapping manifest:
I am getting the next object in the cluster:
Looks very weird. I am stating that values are mangled.
Expected behaviour: