Standardize verified TTL to match the window config #21
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
joecorall
changed the title
joecorall
changed the title
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I thought ten days for the verification cache ttl would be good so we wouldn't bother legit clients. But need some better data around this to make a deviation like that from the bot and rate limit cache ttl. Reason being, this is sort of confusing and not documented at all.
Instead let's just set the verification cache as the same ttl the rate/bots have. It might be likely that after a verification's ttl expires (and its associated rate ttl does, too) the client's subnet may not even get challenged again if they happen to visit say 2d later and the subnet is no longer in the limit