On 4 Sep 2008, at 1:48 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
Ian Ward Comfort wrote:
RewriteRule ^ - [C,E=AJP_REMOTE_USER:%{ENV:REMOTE_USER}]
I think, that forwarding the full subprocess_env table is to much
and usually not what is needed.
I agree.
If you really have use cases, where there are lots
not take the
performance hit for the sake of logic. (Reality interferes with clean
design again.)
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 02:00:47 -0700 Ian Ward Comfort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
To me, 'ProxyEnvVar REMOTE_USER' is succinct and effective.
I'd say quite the reverse! REMOTE_USER is not normally
new directives? Namespace pollution?)
--
Ian Ward Comfort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System Administrator, Student Computing, Stanford University
On 28 Aug 2008, at 12:23 PM, Ian Ward Comfort wrote:
[...]
Any further thoughts on this thread? If not, I'll take a stab at a
patch and cross my fingers re: inclusion.
--
Ian Ward Comfort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System Administrator, Student Computing, Stanford University
mod_jk, unless anyone
foresees a problem with this.
* What's an appropriate name for the directive -- ProxyEnvVar?
--
Ian Ward Comfort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System Administrator, Student Computing, Stanford University
to be
backported to 2.2).
I don't think I understand the API versioning issues, but the
possibility of a 2.2 backport would make me happy. :)
--
Ian Ward Comfort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System Administrator, Student Computing, Stanford University
