PacerLoginException errors

[ERosendo]

In this issue, we can fill the bugs related to the PacerLoginException:

• [x] Attempts to purchase PACER documents from the Appellate Court: I've identified this issue during a review of PACER fetch queue records. This issue shares similarities with #4074, but here the problem specifically concerns fetching recap documents. While the recap-fetch endpoint allows users to identify the desired PDF by providing the RECAP Document ID, the PacerFetchQueueSerializer fails to validate the associated court_id.
• [x] COURTLISTENER-7DJ: CL is raising the PacerLoginException within the get_and_process_free_pdf method. There are currently 8 events reported in Sentry, all related to documents originating from the Southern District of New York. I manually reviewed all 8 events and confirmed that the documents are accessible. I cloned the dockets and successfully retrieve the documents using recap-fetch endpoint in my local environment. This suggests that PACER might have blocked our access after running the new script for retrieving iquery pages.

[mlissner]

Yeah, seems like we can ignore the first one!

The second one seems like a fix like in #4074?

[ERosendo]

The second one seems like a fix like in https://github.com/freelawproject/courtlistener/issues/4074?

Yes, you're right.

[mlissner]

But in other words: NO ERRANT LOGIN EXCEPTIONS?

[ERosendo]

• [x] Big documents raising the Exception: After merging #4071 and directing all requests to PACER through a proxy to use static IPs, I noticed some of the failing PACER fetches were big files. At first, I thought that PACER was not able to serve those files. However, further testing revealed that the proxy was discarding the responses.

  To address this, we need to increase the maximum response size handled by the proxy to accommodate larger PACER responses. This can be achieved by adjusting the maxResponseBodySize parameter in the proxy configuration. Based on the top 10 largest files in the database, we propose a value of 300MB (314572800 bytes) to accommodate these file sizes.

[mlissner]

I think we're all done here, but please let me know if I'm mistaken. Thank you for your work on this (back in May!).