Skip to content

feat(doctor): probe both front door listeners instead of trusting the supervisor pid - #432

Merged
Mearman merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/doctor-door-listeners
Oct 13, 2026
Merged

Mearman merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/doctor-door-listeners

Conversation

@Mearman

@Mearman Mearman commented Oct 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

doctor and frontdoor status reported a front door as healthy from its supervisor pid while every connection to both of its listeners timed out, because a door whose event loop is blocked is alive and accepts nothing (#424).

Both commands now probe the serving door's listeners themselves: a TLS handshake against agent-shim's CA on the provider listener, and a plain TCP connect on the CONNECT surface, which every plain OAuth session reaches Anthropic through. Each is timed on its own. A listener that does not accept within the probe's bound fails the doctor check, names the sessions it cuts off and the restart that replaces it; frontdoor status prints one line per listener, and its JSON gains a listeners list.

The door's event-loop delay is not persisted to the state file, because releases that read it strictly would then treat it as malformed; the probe latency is the observable that matters to a session.

Refs #428.

@Mearman

Mearman commented Oct 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 20bce9c144

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 12, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
🔒 Security Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-13T00:48:16.154178Z 5574008 Manual request
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@Mearman

Mearman commented Oct 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 78f705ccd3

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@Mearman
Mearman force-pushed the feat/doctor-door-listeners branch from 78f705c to a5b8b23 Compare October 13, 2026 00:31
@Mearman

Mearman commented Oct 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: a5b8b231b4

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

… supervisor pid

A door whose event loop is blocked is alive and accepts nothing, and doctor and frontdoor status
reported one healthy supervisor while every connection to both listeners timed out. Both now ask
the listeners themselves: a TLS handshake against the CA on the provider listener and a plain
connect on the CONNECT surface, which plain OAuth sessions use, each timed. A listener that does
not accept fails the check naming the sessions it cuts off and the restart that replaces it.

Refs #428
@Mearman
Mearman force-pushed the feat/doctor-door-listeners branch from a5b8b23 to 5574008 Compare October 13, 2026 00:44
@Mearman

Mearman commented Oct 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 557400876a

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@Mearman
Mearman merged commit eebec5b into main Oct 13, 2026
31 checks passed
@Mearman
Mearman deleted the feat/doctor-door-listeners branch October 13, 2026 00:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant