Martin Kraemer wrote:
> About the X-Forwarded-* stuff: It's non-standard anyway (you can add
> any X-whatever header and still be RFC2616 compliant) so I'd rather
> not see it in 1.3 now (maybe in the next release ;-)
>
> I've seen proxies like squid hang because of nonstandard headers
> (proxy-
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 10:44:16PM +0200, Martin Kraemer wrote:
> Yes, the patch was correct (IMHO) and yes, I committed this one.
>
> About the X-Forwarded-* stuff: It's non-standard anyway (you can add
> any X-whatever header and still be RFC2616 compliant) so I'd rather
> not see it in 1.3 now
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 06:28:24PM +0200, Thomas Eibner wrote:
> From: Anthony Howe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [apache-modules] Setting bytes_sent in Request Record while generating
> all headers by myself in Apache 1.3
>
> >Number: 6841
>ap_kill_timeout(r);
> +
> +
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 08:18:53PM +0200, Thomas Eibner wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 02:02:53PM -0400, Greg Marr wrote:
> > At 01:30 PM 05/29/2002, Thomas Eibner wrote:
> > >Index: proxy_http.c
> > >===
> > >RCS file: /home/cvspub
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 02:02:53PM -0400, Greg Marr wrote:
> At 01:30 PM 05/29/2002, Thomas Eibner wrote:
> >Index: proxy_http.c
> >===
> >RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apache-1.3/src/modules/proxy/proxy_http.c,v
> >retrieving revision 1.
At 01:30 PM 05/29/2002, Thomas Eibner wrote:
>Index: proxy_http.c
>===
>RCS file: /home/cvspublic/apache-1.3/src/modules/proxy/proxy_http.c,v
>retrieving revision 1.98
>diff -u -r1.98 proxy_http.c
>--- proxy_http.c21 Apr 2002
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 07:44:16PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Thomas Eibner wrote:
>
> > Inline patch here, but I'm wondering if you want the X-Forwarded-For
> > header to be stuck inside the conditional too?
>
> I think it should be... will sort this out later tonight or first thing
> tomor
Thomas Eibner wrote:
> Inline patch here, but I'm wondering if you want the X-Forwarded-For
> header to be stuck inside the conditional too?
I think it should be... will sort this out later tonight or first thing
tomorrow, have to leave the internet cafe now to fetch someone.
Regards,
Graham
--
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 07:20:17PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Thomas Eibner wrote:
>
> > Ah yes, X-Forwarded-For is there, but not the two others there is in
> > 2.0 (X-Forwarded-Server and X-Forwared-Host) I read in the source that
> > someone thinks it needs to go into the Via header instea
Thomas Eibner wrote:
> Ah yes, X-Forwarded-For is there, but not the two others there is in
> 2.0 (X-Forwarded-Server and X-Forwared-Host) I read in the source that
> someone thinks it needs to go into the Via header instead. And as I can
> read from the source, X-Forwarded-For is only sent when
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 07:10:25PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Thomas Eibner wrote:
>
> > Looking at apache-1.3 in cvs VS httpd-2.0 there seems to be a few
> > changes, and the X-Forwarded-* headers are some of them. I have a
> > patch ready if needed (with what I believe are your comments in
Thomas Eibner wrote:
> Looking at apache-1.3 in cvs VS httpd-2.0 there seems to be a few
> changes, and the X-Forwarded-* headers are some of them. I have a
> patch ready if needed (with what I believe are your comments in
> it).
Just checked - the X-Forwarded-For is definitely there in v1.3. Du
On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 06:47:20PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Thomas Eibner wrote:
>
> > Anyone looked at the remaining open bugs in 1.3 and might want to include
> > this patch (and bug)?
>
> Only if someone can verify that this patch actually does anything. The
> proxy has been largely rew
Thomas Eibner wrote:
> Anyone looked at the remaining open bugs in 1.3 and might want to include
> this patch (and bug)?
Only if someone can verify that this patch actually does anything. The
proxy has been largely rewritten since then, so this bug might not still
be outstanding.
There is a rel
14 matches
Mail list logo
