This is currently listed as a show stopper in the 2.2.x/STATUS file:
"""
The edge connection filter cannot be removed:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-httpd-dev&m=105366252619530&w=2
jerenkrantz asks: Why should this block a release?
stas replies: because it requires a rewrite of the fil
On Oct 30, 2005, at 2:05 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
I'm just looking at docs/2.1 and noting some existing pages that
definitely
need updating. No reference to pages that need writing, or to non-
English
versions of anything. I might tackle some of these myself, but no
promises.
*** = really i
This has been discussed many times before and no one
seems to understand what the fundamental problem is.
It is not with the servers at all, it is with the CLIENTS.
What both of you are saying is true... whether you "Vary:"
on "Content-encoding" and/or "User-agent" or not... there
is a risk of
On 11/04/2005 07:36 AM, Florian Zumbiehl wrote:
[..cut..]
>
>>Maybe I'm pessimistic, but I think, omitting the Vary header for
>>uncompressed ressources will lead to "poisoned" caches, which statistically
>>nearly always will request the uncompressed variant and so actually
>>*add* load to yo
On 11/04/2005 08:20 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
>
>
> Graham Leggett wrote:
[..cut..]
>>
>> In this case you'd probably not use the cache at all for this part of the
>> URL space.
>
>
> This is the case we've been discussing where someone wishes to, for
> example, restrict a reverse proxy to a
Graham Leggett wrote:
Joshua Slive said:
I agree with you about 90%. The problem is that there are a very few
things that aren't accounted for in standard HTTP caching rules. One
example is Varying access by client IP address.
I can't see how you could have any meaningful caching at all i
I almost tried to snip the comments below in my reply, and there was nothing
I could clip out - thank you Graham for explaining so clearly the entire design
principals of how and why mod_proxy does exactly what it does.
It leaves us wondering; how can allow from/deny from n.n.n.n be mapped to
RFC
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 02:10:19PM +0100, Martin Kraemer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 12:43:42PM +, Joe Orton wrote:
> > Converting all use of $() when adding to INCLUDES in configure to ${} so
> > the paths get expanded immediately would seem like the best fix unless
> > there's some rea
Joshua Slive said:
> I agree with you about 90%. The problem is that there are a very few
> things that aren't accounted for in standard HTTP caching rules. One
> example is Varying access by client IP address.
I can't see how you could have any meaningful caching at all if the
content is varie
Joshua Slive wrote:
I haven't looked carefully at the code, but I don't believe
protocol-level things like the force-response-1.0 variable are stored in
the cache.
If it's a "global" setenvif variable (runs is post-read, before
quick-handler), then these "adjustments work, because
"force-re
"Bengt-Arne Fjellner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The documentation for APR::Request ought to mention that atleast jar
> and params returns undef if there is no cookie/param
done.
--
Joe Schaefer
Graham Leggett wrote:
The httpd cache is simply yet another cache in the chain of HTTP/1.1
caches that are typically present when a browser accepts a page from a
website. The authentication issue is handled by RFC2616 already, and as
long as httpd mod_cache conforms to the correct headers hand
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 08:03:56PM -0500, Joshua Slive wrote:
it seems there is no way to work around client protocol problems. (Just
sending Vary: User-Agent wouldn't fix the problem, because when the user
agent matched a cached variant, the protocol adjustments stil
>>> On 11/3/2005 at 10:38 pm, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> As if the old system wasn't hard enough to wrap one's head around.
Just when
> I had it figured out enough to go and write mod_auth_userdir you guys
go and
> change things on me.
>
> BTW, when did this cha
Xuekun Hu wrote:
So, same reason. Also in file mod_mem_cache.c around line 786, there
is a malloc(mobj->m_len), and a few lines later, another
malloc(obj->count) is performed.
If the second malloc fails, I think also should add something like
free(mobj->m);
mobj->m = NULL;
reasonable?
No.
Nick Kew wrote:
I'm not convinced by that either. In fact, I dislike the whole "run it in a
quick handler" principle - it runs a supertanker through the KISS principle,
and has consequently left us with a cache that never really worked.
Even if we fix this, it's sure to have a high bugrate for
Anyone?
* Andr__ Malo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Author: jim
> > Date: Thu Aug 4 10:07:57 2005
> > New Revision: 227435
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=227435&view=rev
> > Log:
> > mod_proxy: Fix over-eager handling of '%' for reverse proxies.
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-77?page=comments#action_12356757
]
Boyan Boyadjiev commented on MODPYTHON-77:
--
Sorry - I didn't saw the change done for MODPYTHON-83. PyThreadState_Swap must
be added in the non thread case of rele
On 11/4/05, Joe Orton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 03:37:10PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > Joe Orton wrote:
> > > All versions need unclean shutdown at least, not sure about keepalive.
> > > If you
> > > have new data to provide on this front that's great and very w
Eric B. wrote:
# Production Server
ProxyPassReverse /
ProxyPass /ASPTest/ http://192.168.100.1/
# Development & Test Server
ProxyPassReverse /
ProxyPass /dev/ASPTest/ http://192.168.100.1:8080/
Unless you are trying to do somethi
Brandon Fosdick wrote:
Noobie question...what's the difference between authentication,
> authorization and access?
Authentication asks "is this user who they say they are", this stage
usually involves a username and password of some sort, or a certificate,
etc.
Authorisation asks "is this
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 03:37:10PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> Joe Orton wrote:
> > All versions need unclean shutdown at least, not sure about keepalive. If
> > you
> > have new data to provide on this front that's great and very welcome, please
> > send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] bugzilla i
So, same reason. Also in file mod_mem_cache.c around line 786, there
is a malloc(mobj->m_len), and a few lines later, another
malloc(obj->count) is performed.
If the second malloc fails, I think also should add something like
free(mobj->m);
mobj->m = NULL;
reasonable?
Thx, Xuekun
On 11/3/05
23 matches
Mail list logo
