Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

> Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> I do wish people would read the specification to refresh their memory >> before summarizing.  RFC 2616 doesn't say anything about cookies -- it >> doesn't have to because there are already several mechanisms for marking >> a request or response as varying.  In this ca

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

On Wed, 5 May 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Few people know this but Microsoft Internet Explorer and other > major browsers only PRETEND to support "Vary:". > > In MSIE's case... there is only 1 value that you can use with > "Vary:" that will cause MSIE to make any attempt at all to > cache the

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

On Mon, 3 May 2004, Neil Gunton wrote: > Well, that truly sucks. If you pass options around in params then > whenever someone follows a link posted by someone else, they will > inherit that person's options. The only alternative might be to make > pages 'No-Cache' and then set the 'AccelIgnoreNoCa

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

Just to add another wrinkle, even though it's only somewhat related, I'm committing a patch to 2.1-dev that allows Apache to "keep" previously generated cookies even when used as a Proxy server... Can't recall the PR # now, but after talking with Roy we both think that it's a good idea. -- ==

AuthBasic/mod_auth_pgsql

While trying to get mod_auth_pgsql-2.0.2b1 to work with 22 April CVS-httpd, I found that the reason I could not authenticate against a postgresql server was that mod_auth_pgsql received an empty user field in the request structure. Strangely, it received the correct password from the server.. How c

Re: Sample code for IPC in modules

> I put the new version at > to save on e-mail bandwidth. if you're interested in this kind of thing, I've wrapped up mod_example_ipc in an Apache-Test tarball: http://perl.apache.org/~geoff/mod_example-ipc.tar.gz for no particular reason except

Re: ssl_gcache_data preventing httpd startup

On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 09:36:14PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote: > I have just installed the latest published version of httpd (v2.0.49), > and the problem where httpd refuses to start unless the file > ssl_gcache_data is manually deleted beforehand is still there. > > I recall some recent discus

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If this fellow were to simply 'stuff' his Cookie into the > 'extra text' part of the User-Agent: string and send > out a "Vary: User-Agent" along with the response > then it would actually work the way he expects it too. Thanks to Roy and Kevin for your insight. Sorry if

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: jorton 2004/05/05 09:29:59 Index: STATUS *) Readd suexec setuid and user check (now APR supports it) os/unix/unixd.c: r1.69 +1: nd, trawick + +1: jorton, if surrounded with #ifdef APR_USETID to retain + compatibility

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS

On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 03:05:45PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >jorton 2004/05/05 09:29:59 > > > Index: STATUS > > > *) Readd suexec setuid and user check (now APR supports it) > >os/unix/unixd.c: r1.69 > > +1: nd, trawick > > +

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

Hi Neil... This is Kevin Kiley... Personally, I don't think this discussion is all that OT for Apache but others might disagree. "Vary:" is still a broken mess out there and if 'getting it right' is still anyone's goal then these are the kinds of discussions that need to take place SOMEWHERE. Ap

Re: Sample code for IPC in modules

(see note on hup cleanup below) On May 5, 2004, at 2:51 AM, Sander Temme wrote: Hi Mark, Thanks for your observations. On May 4, 2004, at 7:18 PM, mark wrote: 2) Dettach is never needed. However, depending on desired results, it is usually desireable to perform a destroy when a HUP signal is se

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Bottom line: > > In order to do your 'Cookie' scheme and have it work with > all major browsers you might have to give up on the idea > that the responses can EVER be 'cached' locally by > a browser... but now you also lose the ability to have > it cached by ANYONE. > >

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

> Neil wrote... > > Thanks again Kevin for the insight and interesting links. It seems to me > that there are basically three components here: My server, intermediate > caching proxies, and the end-user browser. From my understanding of the > discussion so far, each of these can be covered as foll

Need Help Debugging Shared Library (libaprutil-0.so)

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21719 Since my submitted bug hasn't been resolved in the 9 months since I first reported it, I figure it's about time I try and resolve this problem myself since I do have the source code. I've done a partial debug on the failure but can't get e

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > MOST Proxy Cache Servers ( including ones that SAY they are > HTTP/1.1 compliant ) do NOT handle Vary: and they will simple > treat ANY response they get with a "Vary:" header of any kind > exactly the way MSIE seems to. They will treat it as if it was > "Vary: *" ( Vary

Re: Need Help Debugging Shared Library (libaprutil-0.so)

Steve Waltner wrote: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21719 Since my submitted bug hasn't been resolved in the 9 months since I first reported it, I figure it's about time I try and resolve this problem myself since I do have the source code. I've done a partial debug on the fa

[STATUS] (apache-1.3) Wed May 5 23:45:07 EDT 2004

APACHE 1.3 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/04/19 18:53:57 $] Release: 1.3.31-dev: In development. Plan to T&R week of April 19. 1.3.30: Tagged April 9, 2004. Not released. 1.3.29: Tagged October 24, 2003. Announced Oct 29, 2

[STATUS] (httpd-2.0) Wed May 5 23:45:14 EDT 2004

APACHE 2.0 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/05/05 16:29:58 $] Release: 2.0.50 : in development 2.0.49 : released March 19, 2004 as GA. 2.0.48 : released October 29, 2003 as GA. 2.0.47 : released July 09, 2003 as GA.

[STATUS] (httpd-2.1) Wed May 5 23:45:20 EDT 2004

APACHE 2.1 STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2004/04/27 22:09:17 $] Release [NOTE that only Alpha/Beta releases occur in 2.1 development]: 2.1.0 : in development Please consult the following STATUS files for information on related proj

Re: mod_proxy distinguish cookies?

FYI: I recently had a long exchange with Microsoft's support regarding the Vary header, and the outcome was that they have at least *documented* their RFC2616 compliance issue: Best regards, Julian -- bytes GmbH -- http://www.gre