A way that allows active closing of connections, similar to the 444 status code in nginx

[AtarisMio]

Welcome!

• [X] Yes, I've searched similar issues on GitHub and didn't find any.
• [X] Yes, I've searched similar issues on the Traefik community forum and didn't find any.

What did you expect to see?

I have looked into related issue, where a proposal was mentioned. However, this proposal only allows for closing connection passive. It controls the closing of connections through timeouts or max connections, whereas the 444 status code in nginx can be controlled by the upstream.

[nmengin]

Hello @AtarisMio,

Discussing the issue with other maintainers, we're unsure to clearly understand your need. Could you describe your use-case more elaborately, please?

[aless3]

I think what they are trying to achieve is closing the connection without a response

the use case (at least for me) would not return any response if a scanner tries to connect to subdomain "random.domain.tld", like when you connect to https://paudg.box/ (random domain i just typed that doesn't exist)

with logging etc this would allow banning anyone trying to find which services are present (like when using wildcard certificates I think)

useful to preemptively ban generic subdomain scanning

[aless3]

Hello @AtarisMio,

Discussing the issue with other maintainers, we're unsure to clearly understand your need. Could you describe your use-case more elaborately, please?

the author put a thumbs up on my last reply probably indicating that the use case is what I described, the issue is in the status waiting for an author's reply (I think)

bumping so that this issue can change label and go forward, probably to the end of the backlog considering the not great traction it has, but better than in "waiting"

[nmengin]

Hey @aless3.

Thanks for your explanations.

We are interested in the use case you've described, but we’re unsure about the use case and the traction it will receive. We are going to leave the status as kind/proposal to give the community time to let us know if they would like this idea. We will reevaluate as people respond.

If you or another community member would like to build it before that happens, let us know, and we will work with you to make sure you have all the information needed.

Let us know here before you start. We prefer to work with our community members at the beginning of the design process to ensure that we are aligned and can move quickly with the review and merge process.

Conversation is time-boxed to 6 months.

[emilevauge]

Hello As we need to focus on most wanted features and there is not much support from the community on this one, we made the decision to close it. However, we might get back to this in the future if the community asks for it.