fix(client-ip): Fall back to peer IP instead of returning 500 #2003

Merged
nex merged 1 commit from eleboucher/continuwuity:fix/client-ip-fallback into main 2026-07-17 12:46:11 +00:00
Contributor

The axum-client-ip extractor returns a 500 whenever the header set request_ip_source is absent, duplicated, or unparseable. This breaks proxies that don't emit it on every request , which only sets X-Envoy-External-Address for requests it treats as external, turning much of sync and federation into 500s.

The client IP is only used for last-seen, logging, and rate limiting, so a 500 is the wrong failure mode. This adds a ClientIp wrapper that falls back to the connection peer address instead, logging the reason once. Call sites only change their import.

Fixes: #1986

Pull request checklist:

  • This pull request targets the main branch, and the branch is named something other than
    main.
  • I have written an appropriate pull request title and my description is clear.
  • I understand I am responsible for the contents of this pull request.
  • I have followed the contributing guidelines:
The `axum-client-ip` extractor returns a 500 whenever the header set `request_ip_source` is absent, duplicated, or unparseable. This breaks proxies that don't emit it on every request , which only sets `X-Envoy-External-Address` for requests it treats as external, turning much of sync and federation into 500s. The client IP is only used for last-seen, logging, and rate limiting, so a 500 is the wrong failure mode. This adds a `ClientIp` wrapper that falls back to the connection peer address instead, logging the reason once. Call sites only change their import. <!-- Example: This pull request allows us to warp through time and space ten times faster than before by double-inverting the warp drive with hyperheated jump fluid, both making the drive faster and more efficient. This resolves the common issue where we have to wait more than 10 milliseconds to engage, use, and disengage the warp drive when travelling between galaxies. --> <!-- Closes: #... --> Fixes: #1986 <!-- Uncomment the above line(s) if your pull request fixes an issue or closes another pull request by superseding it. Replace `#...` with the issue/pr number, such as `#123`. --> **Pull request checklist:** <!-- You need to complete these before your PR can be considered. If you aren't sure about some, feel free to ask for clarification in #dev:continuwuity.org. --> - [x] This pull request targets the `main` branch, and the branch is named something other than `main`. - [x] I have written an appropriate pull request title and my description is clear. - [x] I understand I am responsible for the contents of this pull request. - I have followed the [contributing guidelines][c1]: - [x] My contribution follows the [code style][c2], if applicable. - [x] I ran [pre-commit checks][c1pc] before opening/drafting this pull request. - [x] I have [tested my contribution][c1t] (or proof-read it for documentation-only changes) myself, if applicable. This includes ensuring code compiles. - [x] My commit messages follow the [commit message format][c1cm] and are descriptive. <!-- Notes on these requirements: - While not required, we encourage you to sign your commits with GPG or SSH to attest the authenticity of your changes. - While we allow LLM-assisted contributions, we do not appreciate contributions that are low quality, which is typical of machine-generated contributions that have not had a lot of love and care from a human. Please do not open a PR if all you have done is asked ChatGPT to tidy up the codebase with a +-100,000 diff. - In the case of code style violations, reviewers may leave review comments/change requests indicating what the ideal change would look like. For example, a reviewer may suggest you lower a log level, or use `match` instead of `if/else` etc. - In the case of code style violations, pre-commit check failures, minor things like typos/spelling errors, and in some cases commit format violations, reviewers may modify your branch directly, typically by making changes and adding a commit. Particularly in the latter case, a reviewer may rebase your commits to squash "spammy" ones (like "fix", "fix", "actually fix"), and reword commit messages that don't satisfy the format. - Pull requests MUST pass the `Checks` CI workflows to be capable of being merged. This can only be bypassed in exceptional circumstances. If your CI flakes, let us know in matrix:r/dev:continuwuity.org. - Pull requests have to be based on the latest `main` commit before being merged. If the main branch changes while you're making your changes, you should make sure you rebase on main before opening a PR. Your branch will be rebased on main before it is merged if it has fallen behind. - We typically only do fast-forward merges, so your entire commit log will be included. Once in main, it's difficult to get out cleanly, so put on your best dress, smile for the cameras! --> [c1]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md [c2]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/docs/development/code_style.mdx [c1pc]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#pre-commit-checks [c1t]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#running-tests-locally [c1cm]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#commit-messages
fix(client-ip): Fall back to peer IP instead of returning 500
All checks were successful
Auto Labeler / Apply labels based on changed files (pull_request_target) Successful in 3s
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 2m9s
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 12m19s
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
4829d122f4
@ -0,0 +46,4 @@
return;
}
warn!(%rejection, "Could not resolve client IP from request_ip_source; using peer address");
Owner

nit: I'd argue this should be a debug_warn!() instead of a one-time warning

nit: I'd argue this should be a `debug_warn!()` instead of a one-time warning
nex marked this conversation as resolved
@ -0,0 +55,4 @@
use super::*;
const PEER: SocketAddr = SocketAddr::new(IpAddr::V4(Ipv4Addr::new(198, 51, 100, 7)), 8448);
Owner

nit: If we're adding unit tests for this, could we also test against IPv6 for completeness' sake?

nit: If we're adding unit tests for this, could we also test against IPv6 for completeness' sake?
nex marked this conversation as resolved
nex approved these changes 2026-07-16 17:15:29 +00:00
eleboucher force-pushed fix/client-ip-fallback from 4829d122f4
All checks were successful
Auto Labeler / Apply labels based on changed files (pull_request_target) Successful in 3s
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 2m9s
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 12m19s
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
to d3877c71e7
All checks were successful
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m46s
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 10m17s
2026-07-16 18:34:14 +00:00
Compare
eleboucher force-pushed fix/client-ip-fallback from d3877c71e7
All checks were successful
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m46s
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 10m17s
to 506288415f
All checks were successful
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 7s
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 5s
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 3m46s
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 10m39s
2026-07-16 19:46:57 +00:00
Compare
nex merged commit 3a74ce6151 into main 2026-07-17 12:46:11 +00:00
nex deleted branch fix/client-ip-fallback 2026-07-17 12:46:12 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No reviewers
No milestone
No project
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
continuwuation/continuwuity!2003
No description provided.