On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 09:40:54AM -0500, Stas Bekman wrote: > Joe Orton wrote: > >On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 04:37:49PM -0500, Stas Bekman wrote: > > > >>I can't recall whether this was discussed before, but t/modules/proxy.t > >>fails with httpd-2.1. Is anybody following the mod_proxy changes? > > > > > >I'll note that this may get fixed such that it only works for enabling a > >reverse-proxy "decision" by a module (i.e. r->proxyreq == > >PROXYREQ_REVERSE), so the mod_proxy changes alone may not be sufficient > >to fix the mod_perl tests. > > > >We had a brief discussion on this previously: I still don't think it > >makes sense for a module to ever decide that a particular request has > >been "forward-proxied", that can only be a product of the configuration > >(both of client and server). So if you disagree with this you'll have > >to argue that case... > > What's wrong with a dynamic run-time decision?
Well, convince me that it's useful decide it dynamically. If the client is not configured to use the server as a forward proxy, and the server is not configured up-front to act as a forward proxy, when does it make sense to treat a request as being "forward proxied"? Whether or not the server acts as a *reverse proxy* is of course something the server can decide autonomously and hence dynamically at run-time. > Isn't that a regression problem? I believe that's how it worked in apache > 1.3. Change in behaviour, yes; regression, that's the debate... joe --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
