On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Mark D. Roth <r...@google.com> wrote: > > Do we know that there are cases where we'll need to support this? I don't > doubt that there are cases where only connections to external servers > should go through the proxy, but I wonder how many cases there are where > users will need to use both internal and external servers with gRPC. >
So let me get this straight: we think there are users who can't use DNS for external hostnames and need to use a proxy for external services. We know this is most likely in corporate and server environments (for security). But we wouldn't support those user's jumping further on the gRPC bandwagon because it either wouldn't work or performance and overhead would be poor. Or conversely: if you are using gRPC for your own communication, you cannot use gRPC to communicate with "the cloud", except if you accept a performance drop for the existing traffic and increased overhead. If/when we do support this, do we have some idea how this would be > configured? Is there some standard way of configuring which server names > are internal vs. which are external, or would it be custom code for each > environment? > Probably custom code. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "grpc.io" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to grpc-io+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to grpc-io@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/grpc-io. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/grpc-io/CA%2B4M1oMyT_9h9mxtBC2hVFWtLmGvMEnpBT4uJKgMBnitSaKSOw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
