Re: About the relevance of bitfields usage (was: fate of mod_lbmethod_rr...)

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > > Common sense tells me that alignment should be preserved, but unless we > can > > trust the spec to ensure that assumption, we should err on the side of > > caution. > > So let's not use bitfields, there are other

Re: About the relevance of bitfields usage (was: fate of mod_lbmethod_rr...)

nd them. > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:03 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > If devs want to promote an API and then continuously break ABI on trunk, > > I'm way beyond arguing with such individuals. Just a few choice examples > > w

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.19 as GA

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:55 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > >> Can anyone get mod_lbmethod_rr.c to build? >> > > That's funny actually. The very f

Re: svn commit: r1736242 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/modules/proxy/examples/mod_lbmethod_rr.dsp

I think the argument will quickly become moot... see other thread. I also don't expect we will persist .dsp on trunk for very much longer, /shrug On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 9:00 PM, wrote: > > Author:

fate of mod_lbmethod_rr (was: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.19 as GA)

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:55 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > >> Can anyone get mod_lbmethod_rr.c to build? >> > > That's funny actually. The very f

Re: svn commit: r1736243 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/cache/mod_socache_shmcb.c

Without objection, I'll be committing the backport in an hr or so for the morning T this hardly seems to merit a vote, but any objections are welcome. On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:06 PM, wrote: > Author: wrowe > Date: Tue Mar 22 20:06:32 2016 > New Revision: 1736243 > > URL:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.19 as GA

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: > > Am 22.03.2016 um 20:55 schrieb William A Rowe Jr: > >> Can anyone get mod_lbmethod_rr.c to build? >> > > my Fedora 23 rpm-spec builds without any issue or change - most modules >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.19 as GA

Finally, just confirming we have decided that C99 is now the minimum supported compiler feature set- used for the vardic macros in h2_filter.c? On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.19 can be found > at the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.19 as GA

Can anyone get mod_lbmethod_rr.c to build? I'm seeing 'name' : is not a member of 'proxy_balancer' errors, as well as ap_proxy_retry_worker() undefined (converted into an optional function, perhaps?) On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > The pre-release

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.19 as GA

Note that mod_socache_shmcb.c introduced UINT_MAX without including limits.h... whoops. Investigating. On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.19 can be found > at the usual place: > >

Re: [Patch] Ensure HTTP1 filters are only added on HTTP1 requests

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 3:58 AM, Stefan Eissing < stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de> wrote: > Hmm, I can tell you for certain that modules encountering HTTP/2 > connections > in 2.4 do not find the filters as they may expect. > Right, that's by design. Existing protocol modules assume a particular

Re: [Patch] Ensure HTTP1 filters are only added on HTTP1 requests

My concern is that this can't and shouldn't change on 2.4.x. I love the concept and it is correct, however there are enough modules relying on the fact that they must remove the http protocol filters that changing the default behavior is effectively breaking binary ABI. Thoughts? Cheers, Bill

Re: [PATCH] Add "FreeListen" to support IP_FREEBIND

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Tim Bannister wrote: > On 8 Mar 2016, at 10:43, Jan Kaluža wrote: > > On 03/08/2016 10:25 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Yann Ylavic > wrote: > >>> On Tue, Mar 8,

Re: [PATCH] Add "FreeListen" to support IP_FREEBIND

On Mar 7, 2016 21:59, "Yehuda Katz" <yeh...@ymkatz.net> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:06 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: >> >> On Mar 7, 2016 13:54, "Jan Kaluža" <jkal...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > >&

Re: [PATCH] Add "FreeListen" to support IP_FREEBIND

On Mar 7, 2016 13:54, "Jan Kaluža" wrote: > > On 03/07/2016 04:17 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Intstead of adding YAD (yet another directive ;) ), would it >> be possible to somehow leverage Listen itself, maybe with some >> sort of flag? > > > Yes, that would be quite

Re: Suexec permissions question

I think this can be summarized as follows; Httpd starts as root, changes to httpd user account. AppDev user account is compiled-in to suexec as run-if-owner matches that user account. Suexec invokes AppDev's script with the appropriate userid of AppRun account in lieu of AppDev user. AppRun

Re: svn commit: r1733279 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./ STATUS server/core.c server/util_mutex.c

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > I can do that. However - smartass mode on - if one uses the actual > "svn merge -c NNN,NNN", subversion will track that and > > svn mergeinfo --show-revs merged ^/httpd/httpd/trunk . > > in a 2.4.x checkout

Re: state of h2 (long)

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > I've had a real lack of time lately to do much on trunk's mod_http2 on the > windows side. The new mod_proxy_http2 requires a few functions from > mod_http2 and with what time I have had I have been unsuccessful

Re: svn commit: r1729495 [2/2] - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./ modules/aaa/ modules/arch/win32/ modules/core/ modules/examples/ modules/filters/ modules/http2/ modules/loggers/ modules/lua/ modul

This looks busted anyways, the author broke the atomic behavior of log messages :( Fix the underlying bug. Each AP# string should have exactly one string value, for later internationalization. There is no way, without the APLOGNO, that this second message can be translated. Cheers, Bill On

Re: svn commit: r1729929 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES include/ap_mmn.h include/http_core.h include/httpd.h server/core.c

On Feb 12, 2016 2:24 AM, "Yann Ylavic" wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 2:04 AM, wrote: > > Author: wrowe > > Date: Fri Feb 12 01:04:58 2016 > > New Revision: 1729929 > > > > +/** Originator's DNS name, if known. NULL if DNS hasn't been checked, >

Re: svn commit: r1729929 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES include/ap_mmn.h include/http_core.h include/httpd.h server/core.c

On Feb 12, 2016 04:45, "Yann Ylavic" <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 10:49 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > On Feb 12, 2016 2:24 AM, "Yann Ylavic" <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >

Re: Shouldn't ap_get_remote_host use req->useragent_addr?

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Jan Kaluža wrote: > > When httpd is running behind a reverse proxy and mod_remoteip is > configured, > > the correct client IP is logged (using %a in the LogFormat), but

Re: svn commit: r1729901 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES include/ap_mmn.h include/http_core.h include/httpd.h server/core.c

I was just about to do the same, but revert and recommit just to simplify the (anticipated) later backport. The bitfield is a bugger. Apparently my make clean; make wasn't building the source tree I thought it was, sigh... Bill On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Rainer Jung

Re: svn commit: r1729901 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES include/ap_mmn.h include/http_core.h include/httpd.h server/core.c

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: > one type of failure remains: > > .../server/core.c: In function 'ap_get_remote_host': > .../server/core.c:959:17: error: cannot take address of bit-field > 'double_reverse' >

Re: svn commit: r1729876 - in /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x: ./ CHANGES STATUS docs/manual/mod/core.xml include/ap_mmn.h include/http_core.h server/core.c

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:06 PM, wrote: > Author: jim > Date: Thu Feb 11 19:06:16 2016 > New Revision: 1729876 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1729876=rev > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/include/ap_mmn.h?rev=1729876=1729875=1729876=diff

Re: Shouldn't ap_get_remote_host use req->useragent_addr?

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:14 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Jan Kaluža <jkal...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > When httpd is running

Re: Improper string concatenation in mod_alias allows code execution out of bounds defined in apache config file.

On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Bartłomiej Żogała wrote: > 5. Some day he wanted the blog to be visible from example.com/ root but > with mod_alias instead mod_rewrite. So he changed line "Alias /wp > /usr/share/wordpress" to "Alias / /usr/share/wordpress". Instead wordpress

Re: Improper string concatenation in mod_alias allows code execution out of bounds defined in apache config file.

s supposed to be in the first place :) On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: > quite old: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=326143=rev > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:25 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 8,

Re: Improper string concatenation in mod_alias allows code execution out of bounds defined in apache config file.

-private/ The statement could use some word-smithing. On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:37 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > Thanks Eric, now looping back to > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/mappers/mod_alias.c?revision=153384=co > to see i

Re: Improper string concatenation in mod_alias allows code execution out of bounds defined in apache config file.

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:21 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > I think my text below should have stated; > > Note that unexpected expansion occurs when trailing slashes are > not balanced between the source url and target path. For example, > Alia

httpd-2.4 --enable-load-all-modules side-effect

./configure [...] "--with-mods-shared=all" \ "--enable-mods-shared=all" \ "--enable-mpms-shared=all" \ "--enable-load-all-modules" \ "--with-mpm=worker" \ While this should be great for testing a variety of modules and is very helpful for building it all, the resulting httpd.conf isn't quite

Re: ABI report

This is excellent, thanks for the effort! You should note that there was no binary compatibility between 2.2.x final and 2.4.x. And there will be no binary compatibility between 2.next (3.0?) and 2.4.x. The interesting branches to compare for 2.2.next and 2.4.next to anticipate any binary

Re: const char *--> char * clean-up

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Christophe JAILLET < christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > Hi, > > in order to avoid the ugliness of things like: > r->protocol = (char*)"HTTP/1.0"; > does the following proposal makes sense to you? > This patch is needed on trunk, yes. Does turning a "char

Re: Worker states for balancer members

On Feb 3, 2016 6:25 AM, "Jim Jagielski" wrote: > > > > On Feb 3, 2016, at 3:10 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group < ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] > >> Sent: Dienstag, 2. Februar

Re: collaboration request - apache server automation testing with swat tool

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:35 AM, Alexey Melezhik wrote: > Hi Bill! > > Any news? ( Please see my previous reply ...) > Intr Intrigued :) But my responses will be delayed, I personally won't have time to look further myself until other backlogged commitments to httpd are

Re: event mpm and slave connections

If you can give me a few days (not httpd'ing again until late Sun eve) - this is very close to the issues we have in mod_ftp with the data connection/request aside the control connection. The right patch will improve both sets of dirty hacks :) Thanks for the proposal! Bill On Fri, Jan 29,

Re: Missing reference...

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Yehuda Katz <yeh...@ymkatz.net> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:51 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > >> I noted that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_HTTP_Server >> doesn't contain a "

Re: Missing reference...

That might be 2/2, I thought he was originally chatting with his sister... On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Yehuda Katz <yeh...@ymkatz.net> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:51 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > >> I noted that ht

Re: collaboration request - apache server automation testing with swat tool

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Alexey Melezhik wrote: > Hi! I am the author of swat - https://github.com/melezhik/swat - > perl/curl based DSL for web services test automation. > I'd like to contribute in at apache server automated testing. Please > take a look at _simple_

Missing reference...

I noted that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_HTTP_Server doesn't contain a "References in Popular Culture" section... ... does anyone have the link to Bill's Foxtrot panels about Jason grabbing his copy of Apache 2.0 Beta?

Re: BalancerMembers (workers): stopped and disabled

What semantics do you suggest for each? True that they have been effectively identical (and redundant) so far... On Jan 26, 2016 12:41, "Jim Jagielski" wrote: > Currently, the idea and "logic" associated w/ stopped and disabled > workers are kind of similar. There is a higher

Fwd: [jira] [Apache Infrastructure] Participation in Code Signing by HTTP Server project, as I am offering to resume builds, not that these are either better or worse than other third part builds.

Just an FYI, I've raised a ticket with infra expressing interest in code signing. Not that these would be any better or worse than the other great third party builds out there. And we still have some license clarifications if we include compiled lgpl or especially gpl bindings. This is also

Re: mod_fcgid and broken doc links

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 18, 2016, at 3:28 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > >

Re: mod_mime_magic, gzipped tarballs and Docker

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Jan Kaluža <jkal...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 01/08/2016 07:44 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> Do we have to repeat the softmagic call if checkzmagic resolves to >> x-gzip/x-deflate and the internal content type needs to be deciphered? &

Re: mod_fcgid and broken doc links

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 14, 2016, at 5:19 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > Good point with your example, this is something that should > > be benchmarked

Re: mod_fcgid and broken doc links

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 13, 2016, at 12:28 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > I can see us moving those modules into trunk (not 2.4), retaining the > > mmn tests

Re: mod_fcgid and broken doc links

On Jan 13, 2016 15:50, "Rich Bowen" wrote: > > Yes, it would be nice to merge them, from the perspective of explaining > things to users. Guess I am still confused what you suggest to merge... Docs or both docs and code... Also curious about released vs unreleased with

Re: mod_fcgid and broken doc links

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Rich Bowen wrote: > mod_fcgid is in a separate repo from the main httpd tree, due to > historical reasons. I presume there are good reasons for this. JimJag > suggested on IRC it's due to its independent release cycle. > > Be that as it may,

Re: mod_mime_magic, gzipped tarballs and Docker

:57 AM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:17 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > >> > >> Agreed it is configuration, bu

Re: mod_mime_magic, gzipped tarballs and Docker

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Jan Kaluža wrote: > > > > Content-Type: application/x-tar > > Content-Encoding: x-gzip > > > > So, the mod_mime_magic is saying here that the body is tarball encoded

Re: graceful restart

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:26 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > If not there is clearly a fourth state, AP_MPMQ_CHILD_STOPPING we > should > > report. > > +

Re: graceful restart

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > To the Knowledgable out there: how can I detect that the server is > gracefully restarting? > > > > Backlground is that HTTP/2 > >

Re: Better ap_casecmpstr[n]?

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > On Dec 29, 2015, at 11:28 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> In a sep thread on dev@apr, OtherBill appears to be trying

Re: svn commit: r1721121 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/http2: h2_h2.c h2_io.c h2_io.h h2_mplx.h h2_push.c h2_request.c h2_request.h h2_session.c h2_session.h h2_stream.c h2_stream.h h2_task.c h2_tas

> > On 12/21/2015 2:54 AM, ic...@apache.org wrote: > >> Author: icing >> Date: Mon Dec 21 10:54:38 2015 >> New Revision: 1721121 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1721121=rev >> Log: >> byte savings by using bit fields, new env vars HTTP2 and H2PUSH, set to >> on when enabled on request

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache HTTP Server 2.4.18 Released

All a@a.o must be moderated (from non-@apache addresses it hits the bit bucket). Enjoying some time with kids and dealing with only critical work email so this one escaped my attention, but if another ASF member wanted to moderate, volunteers are always welcome. Usually I catch these within the

Re: variables

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:40 AM, Stefan Eissing < stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de> wrote: > > Subprocesses get their environment via r->subprocess_env, filled via the > "fixups" hook. This is the usual way how we involve modules in request > processing. But, as I read it, subprocess_env gets filled

Re: OpenSSL 0.9.8/1.0.0 on Trunk

As an alternative, we can flag removing pre openssl 1.0.1 support as a showstopper in STATUS and leave it be for a while longer to make backports a bit easier. Thoughts? On Dec 14, 2015 12:35, "Ruediger Pluem" <rpl...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On 12/14/2015 07:15 PM

OpenSSL 0.9.8/1.0.0 on Trunk

W.r.t. http://svn.apache.org/r1719967 - I'm +1 for the backport. I'd like to propose we remove all support from *trunk* for OpenSSL < 1.0.1 effective now... https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2014-December/00.html We don't deprecate support on maintenance branches (e.g.

Re: Upgrade Summary

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/11/2015 12:12 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com >> <mailto:champio...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >>

Re: Upgrade Summary

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Jacob Champion wrote: > On 12/11/2015 02:36 AM, Bert Huijben wrote: > >> -Original Message- >>> From: Stefan Eissing [mailto:stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de] >>> Protocol implementations should make up their minds in the "propose" >>>

Re: Upgrade Summary

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2015, at 2:07 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > > > Open: > > 1. Protocols like Websocket need to take over the 101 sending themselves > in the "switch protocol" phase. (correct,

Re: mod_http2 and rejecting HTTP/1 requests...

Ignore this bit below; I was reading 2817 against 7230 and hadn't driven down into the 7231 spec yet, and apparently forgot to snip it before clicking send... the insistence on 426 vs poor advise to use 505 still stands On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:19 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.

Re: mod_http2 and rejecting HTTP/1 requests...

I think I know where this author was misguided... On Dec 9, 2015 11:19, "William A Rowe Jr" <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > And then I'm reading a really nonsensical comment in this FAQ... > > https://http2.github.io/faq/#implementation-questions > Can I implem

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache httpd 2.4.18 as GA

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Jan Ehrhardt wrote: > Jim Jagielski in gmane.comp.apache.devel (Tue, 8 Dec 2015 15:38:41 -0500): > >The pre-release test tarballs for Apache httpd 2.4.18 can be found > >at the usual place: > > > > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ > > >

Re: Upgrade Summary

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/09/2015 09:17 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Roy T. Fielding <field...@gbiv.com >> <mailto:field...@gbiv.com>> wrote: >> >>

Re: Upgrades

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Tim Bannister <is...@c8h10n4o2.org.uk> wrote: > On 9 Dec 2015, at 23:19, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > > Because the request body is inbound already at some state of completion > > or incomplete transmission

Re: Upgrade Summary

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/09/2015 03:19 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> Because the request body is inbound already at some state of completion >> or incomplete transmission, it is competing with

Re: Upgrade Summary

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/09/2015 05:19 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> >> _If_ all the other protocols worked like WebSocket and required >> authnz before an upgrade could succeed, it wouldn't make

mod_http2 and rejecting HTTP/1 requests...

Back to h2c, RFC7231 spells out 6.5.15 . 426 Upgrade Required The 426 (Upgrade Required) status code indicates that the server refuses to perform the request using the current protocol but might be willing to do so after the client

Re: Upgrade when !ap_request_has_body(r) only for 2.4.18? (was: svn commit: r1718595 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:30 PM, wrote: > > Author: ylavic > > Date: Tue Dec 8 13:30:30 2015 > > New Revision: 1718595 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1718595=rev > > Log: > > Comment about

Re: Upgrade when !ap_request_has_body(r) only for 2.4.18? (was: svn commit: r1718595 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > +1 for deferring any upgrade changes that do not fix real issues - like > the one proposed for backport by Bill - to 2.4.19 > Agreed, as spelled out in my top-post, simplest path to 2.4.18, and these

Protocol API @bug warnings for 2.4.18?

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Stefan Eissing < > stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de> wrote: > > +1 for deferring any upgrade changes > > > > Agreed, as spelled out in my top-post, simplest path to 2.4.18, and

Re: On the Upgrade request body limit

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:00 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > Define complex, robust. Request (upgrade: somespec) -> 100 continue -> > > request bod

Re: Upgrade Summary

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Jacob Champion wrote: > On 12/08/2015 01:03 PM, Jacob Champion wrote: > >> - The module that won the proposal is given one last chance to check the >> incoming request and fail the upgrade with an immediate HTTP response. >> > > And to add to

Re: On the Upgrade request body limit

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Jacob Champion wrote: > I wrote this in response to Stefan's note on the zero-length request body > limit for h2c Upgrades, then realized it would further fragment the > (already massive) conversation, so here it is. > And I agree to keep

Re: mod_http2 1.0.7+ and Drupal (Was: No H2 Window updates!)

easily trigger this in a test config? > > > Am 07.12.2015 um 17:13 schrieb William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>: > > > > Within internal_internal_redirect; > > > > 83750 fielding /* > > 83750 fielding * XXX: hmm. This is because mod_set

Re: mod_http2 1.0.7+ and Drupal (Was: No H2 Window updates!)

Within internal_internal_redirect; 83750 fielding /* 83750 fielding * XXX: hmm. This is because mod_setenvif and mod_unique_id really need 83750 fielding * to do their thing on internal redirects as well. Perhaps this is a 83750 fielding * misnamed function.

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

Hi folks, sorry for the late interruption after we have already shipped 2.4.16, but there seems to be an issue that merits revisiting before the 2.4.16 API schema is widely adopted. We seem to have misplaced the upgrade handler in the wrong hook. This is easily shown by the fact that we had two

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/07/2015 03:49 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> Just to confirm, the purpose of splitting this up into two separate >> calls to the same function is solely to deal with "OPT

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

Sorry it took so long to respond to this earlier post, some of this might have already been covered... On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > Think about CORS restrictions and other stuff. > - I think its the protocol handlers job to deal with

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 7, 2015 8:43 AM, "William A Rowe Jr" <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-6.7 makes things more > interesting, it calls out tha

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

fusing? > Am 07.12.2015 um 21:29 schrieb William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>: > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Dec 7, 2015 8:43 AM, "William A Rowe Jr" <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: >> &g

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 4:12 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Stefan Eissing < > stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de> wrote: > >> There can be no 100 after a 101. After a 101, the downstream speaks the >> new pr

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Jacob Champion wrote: > On 12/07/2015 11:55 AM, Jacob Champion wrote: > >> > - moving things to post read sounds tempting, however I'm not sure if >> we want to upgrade on non-authed request or not, for example. I am not >> sure what else we

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 5:38 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-6.7 makes things more > > interesting, it calls o

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

release. WDTY? On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 10:38 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > Hi folks, sorry for the late interruption after we have already shipped > 2.4.16, but there seems to be an issue that merits revisiting before the > 2.4.16 API schema is widely adopt

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > ok, after some more thinking. if a tls+http/1.1 upgrade together with > Expect is indeed a use case, then, to make that work, sending the 101 needs > to become the task of the switch protocol handler itself.

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:07 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > > > the body ought to be > > set aside for any (relevant) TLS response (which needs the > > handshake...). > > Hmm, no need to set aside,

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/07/2015 02:40 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > >> Not "noise" at all... I'm imagining a mod_echo protocol example that >> looks much like your use case... >> >> 1st

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:05 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Stefan Eissing < > stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de> wrote: > >> ok, after some more thinking. if a tls+http/1.1 upgrade together with >> Expect is

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:27 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > &

Re: 2.4 pause - mod_http2 patchset Upgrade h2c vs mod_ssl Upgrade tls

On Dec 7, 2015 19:29, "Yann Ylavic" <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:58 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> The

Re: reverse proxy wishlist

On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 4, 2015, at 10:25 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > My observation was that that the mapped pages for 2-6 fundamental > socache, lbm

Re: Broken 2.4 ./configure

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Stefan Eissing <stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de > wrote: > I put it on my TODO for friday, maybe I can conf/ifdef around it without > too much pain. > > Am 02.12.2015 um 23:16 schrieb William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>: > > On Wed,

Re: reverse proxy wishlist

lse... Not seeing what issue exactly > you're trying to address. > > > On Dec 3, 2015, at 6:25 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 3,

Re: DER encoded cert no longer supported in 2.4 since 2.4.8

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: > I did a 2.2 to 2.4 migration today. The old 2.2 server was using a > certificate file, which was DER encoded and the new 2.4 one didn't like it. > > It seems support for DER encoded certs was removed in 2.4.8 as a

Re: reverse proxy wishlist

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Nick Kew wrote: > > > I'm looking, none of these seem like huge hacks, wondering > > which of them trigger your concern? > > Well, your talk of refactoring config led me to wonder > whether you were proposing another tilt at the whole directory

Re: reverse proxy wishlist

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > What would *you* like to see as new features or enhancements > w/ mod_proxy, esp reverse proxy. HTTP/2 support, of course :) It will be interesting to be able to leverage and compare a mod_proxy_serf vs a

Re: reverse proxy wishlist

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 3, 2015, at 11:09 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >

Re: reverse proxy wishlist

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 3, 2015, at 11:09 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > > > My personal wish list is that we eliminate module bloat by coalescing > > alternative "

<    7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   >