[FEATURE]: option to increase rate limits

[dealloc]

What problem does it solve

Some projects and applications will require higher rate limits than the current configuration allows

What is the solution

A system that allows higher rate limits for certain clients.
The main reason for the rate limits currently is to make sure the system stays within the limits of the current hosting plan, higher funding allows for higher limits thus allowing higher rate limits.

Existing alternatives

Use the existing rate limits

Added value

Allows certain clients to use higher rate limits for more demanding applications

Additional notes

Specifics on how this should be implemented needs to be discussed.

[Stonemercy]

Would self-hosting this API not be a better workaround for people that need higher limits?

[stnokott]

Would be fine if the rate limit was configurable by environment variable.

As far as I can see, there's already a TODO for that:

api/src/Helldivers-2-API/Middlewares/RateLimitMiddleware.cs

Lines 12 to 14 in f2992c6

	// TODO: move to configurable policies.
	private const int DefaultRequestLimit = 5;
	private const int DefaultRequestWindow = 10;

This way, self-hosted deployments can customize the rate limit (possibly to infinite) and the public endpoint can keep its rate limits like they currently are.

This was the case before the switch to .NET and I was very happy with it.

[dealloc]

self hosting would definitely be the primary way to go for people if they need higher rate limits etc, however we need 2 things in place for that to be viable at this moment:

1. like @stnokott mentions it needs to be configurable through environment variables
2. this needs to be properly documented (as requested in [FEATURE]: Docker Setup #46)

[stnokott]

As mentioned in docs/containers.md, deployment-specific options can be supplied as environment variables if they are present in src/Helldivers-2-API/appsettings.json.

So moving the two rate-limit parameters mentioned in #70 (comment) to appsettings.json should solve this issue, right?

[dealloc]

100% correct, next step would indeed be moving rate limits to configuration.