On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Valentin V. Bartenev wrote:
> On Thursday 03 December 2015 11:41:51 Patrick O'Brien wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> We're currently using nginx for SSL/TLS termination, which then
>> proxies the request to a pair of internal pair of load balancers.
>> Since the TLS handshake
Beware the observation bias. Maybe try going back to v1.6.2 (or v1.6.3 for
the latest 1.6)?
These messages indicates the remote side resets the connection, not nginx,
thus your PHP-FPM is responsible for that.
Why? Ask it :o)
---
*B. R.*
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:58 AM, silentmiles wrote:
> I h
I have also started to see these errors in my log -- readv() failed (104:
Connection reset by peer). I recently upgraded from nginx 1.6.2 to 1.8, and
I think they started from this point.
This is with a Linux/PHP-FPM setup. I've found a few mentions of the above
error with this setup, but they're
Let me get back to you on that - we're going to send some traffic through
Cloudflare and see how the traffic breaks out given the choice of all three
protocols.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 12/3/15 9:14 PM, CJ Ess wrote:
> > NGINX devs,
> >
> > I know yo
On Thursday 03 December 2015 11:41:51 Patrick O'Brien wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We're currently using nginx for SSL/TLS termination, which then
> proxies the request to a pair of internal pair of load balancers.
> Since the TLS handshake is performed before nginx is able to figure
> out what hostname is
Hello,
We're currently using nginx for SSL/TLS termination, which then
proxies the request to a pair of internal pair of load balancers.
Since the TLS handshake is performed before nginx is able to figure
out what hostname is being requested, except in cases where SNI is
used, it will accept any r
Hello,
On 12/3/15 9:14 PM, CJ Ess wrote:
> NGINX devs,
>
> I know you were very excited to remove SPDY support from NGINX, but
> for the next few years there are a lot of devices (mobile devices
> that can't upgrade, end users who aren't comfortable upgrading, etc)
> that are not going to have ht
NGINX devs,
I know you were very excited to remove SPDY support from NGINX, but for the
next few years there are a lot of devices (mobile devices that can't
upgrade, end users who aren't comfortable upgrading, etc) that are not
going to have http/2 support. By removing SPDY support you've created
Passive ports are dynamically allocated, so FTP with the stream module is
unlikely to work at all.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Felix HT1 Zhang wrote:
> Dears,
>
> Could Nginx stream support FTP PASSIVE?
>
>
>
> #er nobody;
>
> worker_processes 4;
>
>
>
> #error_log logs/error.log;
>
> #er
https://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/6873127
http://serverfault.com/questions/663290/in-nginx-error-log-ssl-bytes-to-cipher-listinappropriate-fallback
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28010492/nginx-critical-error-with-ssl-handshaking
Posted at Nginx Forum:
https://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,263236
Hi,
We've been encountering this issue quiet frequently. Looks like that is
the reason of our drop in traffic as well.
2015/12/03 16:19:18 [crit] 26272#0: *176263213 SSL_do_handshake() failed
(SSL: error:140A1175:SSL routines:SSL_BYTES_TO_CIPHER_LIST:inappropriate
fallback) while SSL handshaki
Thanks a lot for the clarification guys! :)
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:46 PM, itpp2012 wrote:
> Richard Stanway Wrote:
> ---
> > TCP has no concept of server names, so this is not possible. It only
> > works
> > in HTTP because the client sends
12 matches
Mail list logo
