Support custom gcp ssl policies in frontend load balancer #27
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
maciejkowalczyk
force-pushed
the
supportSslPolicies
branch
from
2d1863a to
e3ef4f2
Compare
mihnjong-l
requested review from
dankocoj-google
and removed request for
dankocoj-google
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Our organization policy requires a secure SSL policy attached to each frontend load balancer in GCP.
This PR adds support for setting custom ones for seller and buyer.
The default policy used if none was provided.
Perhaps these scripts should default to some
MODERN/TLS 1.2profile instead ofCOMPATIBLE?I wouldn't expect any legacy clients to SFE or BFE.