Re: some specfile fixes

2009-03-30 Thread Jan-Frode Myklebust
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 08:41:53AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Thanks for your work on this. I have no way to test that the specfiles > work, and I only update a few fields in them at each release. So it's > really a good thing that someone like you checks them and proposes > fixes. Would you

Re: x-client with SMTP, revisited

2009-03-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Eric, On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 09:06:40PM -0700, Eric Schwab wrote: > We would like to use x-client with the SMTP protocol with haproxy, as a > means to pass along some basic data to the backend SMTP servers. We > looked into this a month or two ago and Willy mentioned that this would > be s

Re: some specfile fixes

2009-03-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:56:07PM +0200, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 08:41:53AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > > Thanks for your work on this. I have no way to test that the specfiles > > work, and I only update a few fields in them at each release. So it's > > really

Apache Error Log, X-Forwarded-For

2009-03-30 Thread Will Buckner
Hey guys, All of my Apaches are logging the load balancer's IP in the error log for source IP. I have changed the LogFormat to use the X-Forwarded-For header for the access log, but is there any way to get the correct IP in the error log? Unless I'm missing something, there is no LogFormat for

Re: Apache Error Log, X-Forwarded-For

2009-03-30 Thread Patrick Viet
Use mod_rpaf and apache will to REMOTE_HOST = X-Forwarded-for in all its processings. stderr.net/rpaf or something like that for the URL. Patrick On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Will Buckner wrote: > Hey guys, > > All of my Apaches are logging the load balancer's IP in the error log for > sour

Re: [RFC] development model for future haproxy versions

2009-03-30 Thread Jeffrey 'jf' Lim
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi all! > > Now that the storm of horror stories has gone with release of 1.3.17, > I'd like to explain what I'm planning to do for future versions of > haproxy. > > Right now there are a few issues with the development process and > the vers

Re: [RFC] development model for future haproxy versions

2009-03-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 10:57:26AM +0800, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Hi all! > > > > Now that the storm of horror stories has gone with release of 1.3.17, > > I'd like to explain what I'm planning to do for future versions of > > haproxy. >

Dynamic configuration changes.

2009-03-30 Thread Brian Gupta
Willy, A while back we had discussed adding a control socket to haproxy to take such actions are manually marking nodes as down, adding new nodes, and other dynamic state changes. Have you thought about this any further since this was last brought up? Thanks, Brian -- - Brian Gupta New York C