-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.2k
Rate limiting /1 #26756
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rate limiting /1 #26756
Changes from all commits
d1c89f3
db6f8d1
fef267f
4b0520d
f18a387
21db92d
daab07a
716bbad
f083c24
06000be
0e4f096
486f245
55e14cf
753e4a3
d71528b
0ad7426
6c1a217
b5a2b92
495149e
d8bc410
6c68bf1
3581f84
d16a43f
77f6d85
c299019
9cececb
af5544c
241c32d
572cd61
0eb3de5
ab96f6b
248ab17
87644ab
2fdd988
c7f1674
e95298f
1358540
c7bc1ef
e0b9597
6c155ec
24732c5
fa17ebf
df0fa51
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,189 @@ | ||
--- | ||
title: Rate limiting middleware in ASP.NET Core | ||
author: rick-anderson | ||
description: Learn how limit requests in ASP.NET Core apps | ||
ms.author: riande | ||
ms.custom: mvc | ||
ms.date: 8/28/2022 | ||
uid: performance/rate-limit | ||
--- | ||
|
||
# Rate limiting middleware in ASP.NET Core | ||
|
||
By [Arvin Kahbazi](https://github.com/Kahbazi) and [Rick Anderson](https://twitter.com/RickAndMSFT) | ||
|
||
:::moniker range=">= aspnetcore-7.0" | ||
|
||
The `Microsoft.AspNetCore.RateLimiting` middleware provides rate limiting middleware. Apps configure rate limiting policies and then attach the policies to endpoints. Apps using rate limiting should be carefully load tested and reviewed before deploying. See [Testing endpoints with rate limiting](#test7) in this article for more information. | ||
|
||
## Rate limiter algorithms | ||
|
||
The [`RateLimiterOptionsExtensions`](/dotnet/api/microsoft.aspnetcore.ratelimiting.ratelimiteroptionsextensions) class provides the following extension methods for rate limiting: | ||
|
||
* [Fixed window](#fixed) | ||
* [Sliding window](#slide) | ||
* [Token bucket](#token) | ||
* [Concurrency](#concur) | ||
|
||
<a name="fixed"></a> | ||
|
||
### Fixed window limiter | ||
|
||
The [`AddFixedWindowLimiter`](/dotnet/api/microsoft.aspnetcore.ratelimiting.ratelimiteroptionsextensions.addfixedwindowlimiter#microsoft-aspnetcore-ratelimiting-ratelimiteroptionsextensions-addfixedwindowlimiter(microsoft-aspnetcore-ratelimiting-ratelimiteroptions-system-string-system-threading-ratelimiting-fixedwindowratelimiteroptions)) method uses a fixed time window to limit requests. When the time window expires, a new time window starts and the request limit is reset. | ||
|
||
Consider the following code: | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet_fixed"::: | ||
|
||
The preceding code: | ||
* Calls [UseRateLimiter](/dotnet/api/microsoft.aspnetcore.builder.ratelimiterapplicationbuilderextensions.useratelimiter) to enable rate limiting. | ||
Rick-Anderson marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
* Creates a fixed window limiter with a policy name of `"fixed"` and sets: | ||
* `permitLimit` to 4 and the time `window` to 12. A maximum of 4 requests per each 12-second window are allowed. | ||
Rick-Anderson marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
* `queueProcessingOrder` to `QueueProcessingOrder.OldestFirst`. | ||
* `queueLimit` to 2. | ||
|
||
Apps should use [Configuration](xref:fundamentals/configuration/index) to set limiter options. The following code updates the preceding code using [`MyRateLimitOptions`](https://github.com/dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/blob/main/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Models/MyRateLimitOptions.cs) for configuration: | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet_fixed2"::: | ||
Rick-Anderson marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
<a name="slide"></a> | ||
|
||
### Sliding window limiter | ||
|
||
A sliding window algorithm: | ||
|
||
* Is similar to the fixed window limiter but adds segments per window. The window slides one segment each segment interval. The segment interval is (window time)/(segments per window). | ||
* Limits the requests for a window to `permitLimit` requests. | ||
* Each time window is divided in `n` segments per window. | ||
* Requests taken from the expired time segment one window back (`n` segments prior to the current segment), are added to the current segment. We refer to the most expired time segment one window back as the expired segment. Consider the following table which shows a sliding window limiter with a 30-second window, 3 segments per window and a limit of 100 requests: | ||
|
||
* The top row and first column shows the time segment. | ||
Rick-Anderson marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
* The second row shows the remaining requests available. The remaining requests are available-requests+recycled. | ||
* Requests at each time moves along the diagonal blue line. | ||
* From time 30 on, the request taken from the expired time segment are added back to the request limit, as shown in the red lines. | ||
|
||
 | ||
|
||
<!-- | ||
| Time | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 | | ||
| ---- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | | ||
| Available | 100-20+0=80 | 80-30+0=50 | 50-40+0=10 | 10-30+20=0 |0+30-10=20 | 20-10+40=50 | 50-35+30=45 | | ||
| 0 | -20 | | | | | | | | ||
| 10 | | -30 | | | | | | | ||
| 20 | | | -40 | | | | | | ||
| 30 | **[+20]** | | | -30 | | | | | ||
| 40 | |**[+30]**| | | -10 | | | | ||
| 50 | | | **[+40]** | | | -10 | | | ||
| 60 | | | | **[+30]** | | | -35| | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think this table is too confusing There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What about something like my updated table? If you don't like that approach, I'll delete it. I also added a couple bullets explaining the blue and red lines. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Maybe slightly better, still not a fan though. Maybe let some other folks look at it and see if they understand? I'm slightly biased, but I like how the algorithm was displayed here. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I had a hard time following that, it struck me as a diagram written by someone very familiar with the algorithm. At any rate the explanation and diagrams belong in dotnet/docs#30426 which @IEvangelist owns, so he can own that. IMAO, rate limiting is a gamechanger so I'm going to merge this so it can be live. I'll tweat it with a challenge to come up with a better diagram. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
|
||
|
||
--> | ||
|
||
The following table shows the data in the previous graph in a different format. The **Remaining** column shows the requests available from the previous segment (The **Carry over** from the previous row). The first row shows 100 available because there's no previous segment: | ||
|
||
| Time | Available | Taken | Recycled from expired | Carry over | | ||
| ---- | ---- | ------| ------ | ---- | | ||
| 0 | 100 | 20 | 0 | 80 | | ||
| 10 | 80 | 30 | 0 | 50 | | ||
| 20 | 50 | 40 | 0 | 10 | | ||
| 30 | 10 | 30 | 20 | 0 | | ||
| 40 | 0 | 10 | 30 | 20 | | ||
| 50 | 20 | 10 | 40 | 50 | | ||
| 60 | 50 | 35 | 30 | 45 | | ||
|
||
The following code uses the sliding window rate limiter: | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet_slide"::: | ||
|
||
<a name="token"></a> | ||
|
||
### Token bucket limiter | ||
|
||
The token bucket limiter is similar to the sliding window limiter, but rather than adding back the requests taken from the expired segment, a fixed number of tokens are added each replenishment period. The tokens added each segment can't increase the available tokens to a number higher than the token bucket limit. The following table shows a token bucket limiter with a limit of 100 tokens and a 10-second replenishment period: | ||
|
||
| Time | Available | Taken | Added | Carry over | | ||
| ---- | ---- | ------| ------| ---- | | ||
| 0 | 100 | 20 | 0 | 80 | | ||
| 10 | 80 | 10 | 20 | 90 | | ||
| 20 | 90 | 5 | 15 | 100 | | ||
| 30 | 100 | 30 | 20 | 90 | | ||
| 40 | 90 | 6 | 16 | 100 | | ||
| 50 | 100 | 40 | 20 | 80 | | ||
| 60 | 80 | 50 | 20 | 50 | | ||
|
||
The following code uses the token bucket limiter: | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet_token"::: | ||
|
||
When `autoReplenishment` is set to `true`, an internal timer replenishes the tokens every `replenishmentPeriod`; when set to `false`, the app must call `TryReplenish` on the limiter. | ||
|
||
<a name="concur"></a> | ||
|
||
### Concurrency limiter | ||
|
||
The concurrency limiter limits the number concurrent requests. Each request reduces the concurrency limit by one. When a request completes, the limit is increased by one. Unlike the other requests limiters that limit the total number of requests for a specified period, the concurrency limiter limits only the number of concurrent requests and doesn't cap the number of requests in a time period. | ||
|
||
The following code uses the concurrency limiter: | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet_concur"::: | ||
|
||
## Limiter algorithm comparison | ||
|
||
The fixed, sliding, and token limiters all limit the maximum number of requests in a time period. The concurrency limiter limits only the number of concurrent requests and doesn't cap the number of requests in a time period. The cost of an endpoint should be considered when selecting a limiter. The cost of an endpoint includes the resources used, for example, time, data access, CPU, and I/O. | ||
|
||
## Rate limiter samples | ||
|
||
The following samples aren't meant for production code but are examples on how to use the limiters. | ||
|
||
### Limiter with `OnRejected`, `RetryAfter`, and `GlobalLimiter` | ||
|
||
The following sample: | ||
|
||
* Creates a [RateLimiterOptions.OnRejected](xref:Microsoft.AspNetCore.RateLimiting.RateLimiterOptions.OnRejected) callback that is called when a request exceeds the specified limit. `retryAfter` can be used with the [`TokenBucketRateLimiter`](https://source.dot.net/#System.Threading.RateLimiting/System/Threading/RateLimiting/TokenBucketRateLimiter.cs), [`FixedWindowLimiter`](https://source.dot.net/#System.Threading.RateLimiting/System/Threading/RateLimiting/FixedWindowRateLimiter.cs), and [`SlidingWindowLimiter`](https://source.dot.net/#System.Threading.RateLimiting/System/Threading/RateLimiting/SlidingWindowRateLimiter.cs) because these algorithms are able to estimate when more permits will be added. The `ConcurrencyLimiter` has no way of calculating when permits will be available. | ||
* Adds the following limiters: | ||
|
||
* A `SampleRateLimiterPolicy` which implements the `IRateLimiterPolicy<TPartitionKey>` interface. The `SampleRateLimiterPolicy` class is shown later in this article. | ||
* A `SlidingWindowLimiter`: | ||
* With a partition for each authenticated user. | ||
* One shared partition for all anonymous users. | ||
* A <xref:Microsoft.AspNetCore.RateLimiting.RateLimiterOptions.GlobalLimiter> that is applied to all requests. The global limiter will be executed first, followed by the endpoint-specific limiter, if one exists. The `GlobalLimiter` creates a partition for each <xref:System.Net.IPAddress>. | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet"::: | ||
|
||
> [!WARNING] | ||
Rick-Anderson marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
>Creating partitions on client IP addresses makes the app vulnerable to Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing. For more information, see [BCP 38 RFC 2827 Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp38). | ||
|
||
See [the samples repository for the complete `Program.cs`](https://github.com/dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/blob/main/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs#L145,L281) file. | ||
|
||
The `SampleRateLimiterPolicy` class | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/SampleRateLimiterPolicy.cs" id="snippet_1"::: | ||
|
||
In the preceding code, <xref:Microsoft.AspNetCore.RateLimiting.RateLimiterOptions.OnRejected> uses <xref:Microsoft.AspNetCore.RateLimiting.OnRejectedContext> to set the response status to [429 Too Many Requests](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/429). The default rejected status is [503 Service Unavailable](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/503). | ||
|
||
### Limiter with authorization | ||
|
||
The following sample uses JSON Web Tokens (JWT) and creates a partition with the JWT [access token](https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/blob/fd1891536f27e959d14a140ff9307b6a21191de9/src/Security/Authentication/JwtBearer/src/JwtBearerHandler.cs#L152-L158). In a production app, the JWT would typically be provided by a server acting as a Security token service (STS). For local development, the dotnet [user-jwts](xref:security/authentication/jwt) command line tool can be used to create and manage app-specific local JWTs. | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet_jwt"::: | ||
|
||
### Limiter with `ConcurrencyLimiter`, `TokenBucketRateLimiter`, and authorization | ||
|
||
The following sample: | ||
|
||
* Adds a `ConcurrencyLimiter` with a policy name of `"get"` that is used on the Razor Pages. | ||
* Adds a `TokenBucketRateLimiter` with a partition for each authorized user and a partition for all anonymous users. | ||
* Sets [RateLimiterOptions.RejectionStatusCode](xref:Microsoft.AspNetCore.RateLimiting.RateLimiterOptions.RejectionStatusCode) to [429 Too Many Requests](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/429). | ||
|
||
:::code language="csharp" source="~/../AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs" id="snippet_adm2"::: | ||
|
||
See [the samples repository for the complete `Program.cs`](https://github.com/dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs.Samples/blob/main/fundamentals/middleware/rate-limit/WebRateLimitAuth/Program.cs#L145,L281) file. | ||
|
||
<a name="test7"></a> | ||
|
||
## Testing endpoints with rate limiting | ||
|
||
Before deploying an app using rate limiting to production, it's a good idea to stress test the app to validate the rate limiters and options used. For example, create a [JMeter script](https://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/jmeter_proxy_step_by_step.html) with a tool like [BlazeMeter](https://guide.blazemeter.com/hc/articles/207421695-Writing-your-first-JMeter-script) or [Apache JMeter HTTP(S) Test Script Recorder](https://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/jmeter_proxy_step_by_step.html) and load the script to [Azure Load Testing](/azure/load-testing/overview-what-is-azure-load-testing). | ||
|
||
Creating partitions with user input makes the app vulnerable to [Denial of Service](https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/tips/ST04-015) (DoS) Attacks. For example, creating partitions on client IP addresses makes the app vulnerable to Denial of Service Attacks that employ IP Source Address Spoofing. For more information, see [BCP 38 RFC 2827 Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks that employ IP Source Address Spoofing](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp38). | ||
|
||
:::moniker-end | ||
Rick-Anderson marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.