On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 00:46, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> >> Ideas for the appropriate patch to httpd? Scope this fix to CONNECT
> >> requests alone, or all forward proxy requests?
> >>
> >>
> > Maybe all forward proxy modules are concerned.
> > There is PR
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
>
>> On 26.11.2013 00:46, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>> >> Ideas for the appropriate patch to httpd? Scope this fix to CONNECT
>> >> requests alone, or all forward proxy requests?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 00:46, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> >> Ideas for the appropriate patch to httpd? Scope this fix to CONNECT
> >> requests alone, or all forward proxy requests?
> >>
> >>
> > Maybe all forward proxy modules are concerned.
> > There is PR
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 8:37 PM, wrote:
> Author: covener
> Date: Mon Nov 4 01:37:31 2013
> New Revision: 1538490
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1538490
> Log:
> c->sbh can be unexpectedly NULL when the thread that pulls the ready
> keepalive
> connection out of the queue laps the thread that pu
Just to inform you.
We discussed it here a few times.
Looks like the hanging L’s seen in status is solved, not seen it anymore since
2.4.7 with APR 1.5.0 APR-util 1.5.3. It was happening with 206 and timeouts,
and there is a timeout fix now which probably solves it.
Thanks!
Steffen
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > For the mod_perl crash with Event that I posted at the URL below, I would
> > suspect that there's some affinity with the original worker thread. Can
> > anyone in mod_perl land con
On 26 Nov 2013, at 3:51 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> As it turns out (or, why didn't I refresh my understanding before), the MPM
> only knows about the conn_rec.
>
> * It could do extra work to learn about the request in order to pass the
> request to the new hook.
> * It could avoid that extra w
> May as well clear sbh in other places where process_socket() returns,
> right?
+1, I think I was zoomed in on the ones that didn't return and would
hit the c->sbh = NULL at the bottom of the method.
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2013, at 3:51 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> > As it turns out (or, why didn't I refresh my understanding before), the
> MPM only knows about the conn_rec.
> >
> > * It could do extra work to learn about the request in order to pass
On 2013-11-25 23:25, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:28 PM, olli hauer wrote:
>>
>>> On 2013-11-25 22:14, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Jeff Trawick
>>> wrote:
> Let's move this to dev
Hi all,
I am trying to use a pkcs11 engine within mod_ssl, and am digging as to how
this might be done.
The closest I've found is this patch
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52473
Anyone know if there is anything newer out there?
Regards,
Graham
--
I've been debugging some problems with incorrectly reverse mapped Location
headers and found some backend servers (e.g. OWA for Exchange 2013) to give
headers like
Location: https://myserver:443/path/file?query
which I think are perfectly fine. mod proxy fails to do the trick because
e
IMHO this should be fixed in the configuration with an additional mapping that
has the port in. In many cases the port matters.
Regards
Rüdiger
From: Thomas Eckert [mailto:thomas.r.w.eck...@gmail.com]
Sent: Dienstag, 26. November 2013 17:11
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: ap_proxy_location_re
On 26.11.2013 09:29, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> Another point is that SNI can not be an IP address according to the RFC
> 6066 :
>
> 3. Server Name Indication
>[...]
>Literal IPv4 and IPv6 addresses are not permitted in "HostName".
>
> and this is not specifically checked by mod_proxy before f
Hi:
On 11/26/2013 06:18 PM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
On 26.11.2013 09:29, Yann Ylavic wrote:
Another point is that SNI can not be an IP address according to the RFC
6066 :
3. Server Name Indication
[...]
Literal IPv4 and IPv6 addresses are not permitted in "HostName".
and this is not spec
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 09:29, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> > Another point is that SNI can not be an IP address according to the RFC
> > 6066 :
> >
> > 3. Server Name Indication
> >[...]
> >Literal IPv4 and IPv6 addresses are not permitted in "HostNam
On 26.11.2013 16:44, Graham Leggett wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to use a pkcs11 engine within mod_ssl, and am digging as to how
> this might be done.
>
> The closest I've found is this patch
> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52473
>
> Anyone know if there is anything ne
Apache HTTP Server 2.4.7 Released
The Apache Software Foundation and the Apache HTTP Server Project
are pleased to announce the release of version 2.4.7 of the Apache
HTTP Server ("Apache"). This version of Apache is our latest GA
release of the new generation 2.4.x branch of Apache H
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
>
>> On 26 Nov 2013, at 3:51 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>>
>> > As it turns out (or, why didn't I refresh my understanding before), the
>> MPM only knows about the conn_rec.
>> >
>> > * It
On 26.11.2013 15:58, olli hauer wrote:
> On 2013-11-25 23:25, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>> See if this brings any happiness:
>>
>> Index: network_io/unix/sockets.c
>> ===
>> --- network_io/unix/sockets.c (revision 1545394)
>> +++ network_io
Thx... the key is httpd-2.4.6-uds-delta.patch and
that shows nothing, that I can see, which would
result in the "old" being faster than the "new"...
especially in the critical section where we do
the apr_sockaddr_info_get() stuff...
On Nov 26, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> I reapplie
On 2013-11-26 22:01, Rainer Jung wrote:
> On 26.11.2013 15:58, olli hauer wrote:
>> On 2013-11-25 23:25, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
>>> See if this brings any happiness:
>>>
>>> Index: network_io/unix/sockets.c
>>> ===
>>> --- network_io/u
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 4:49 PM, olli hauer wrote:
> On 2013-11-26 22:01, Rainer Jung wrote:
> > On 26.11.2013 15:58, olli hauer wrote:
> >> On 2013-11-25 23:25, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >
> >>> See if this brings any happiness:
> >>>
> >>> Index: network_io/unix/sockets.c
> >>>
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> Am Samstag, 23. November 2013, 18:00:40 schrieb Rainer Jung:
> > On 23.11.2013 14:19, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > > (maybe sf already knows something about this)
> > >
> > > [Thu Nov 21 16:20:17.035427 2013] [:emerg] [pid 1237:tid
> > > 4744016
On 26.11.2013 10:38, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> With the per worker (single) connections-reslist model, If the connection
> were to be closed in determine_connection() when the Host mismatches, that
> would be be a painful performance penalty when SNI is enabled (no option to
> disable currently)...
Wit
On 26.11.2013 18:54, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> Do you know if the port can be part of the SNI (eg. "www.domain.net:8080")
> so that it can be checked against the Host (which may contain that port)? I
> can't find any reference about this.
Pure host names (FQDN!) only: RFC 6066, section 3.
Kaspar
26 matches
Mail list logo
