Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
[receiver/tlscheck] Inital Commit of TLS Check Receiver #35441
[receiver/tlscheck] Inital Commit of TLS Check Receiver #35441
Changes from all commits
c2fccb7
b70efa5
0250f98
dc68cad
2d0969b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What is the expected behavior (of validate && the receiver) for a non-https URL? I would expect it to be invalid at validate time, as I don't see a good mechanism for returning that information at runtime in a way that would be consumable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That is a good point and something definitely overlooked.
For the sake of the PR being open so long and becoming harder to merge, I would love to see this as a follow up PR instead updating the current PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we should allow for scheme. We do not need to send an http request here, only establish tcp connection, so scheme doesn't make sense. Related, I think we should change
url
tohost
since we are connecting to a host address via tcp, not sending a http request to a url.