Re: Behaviour of mod_jk AJP 1.3 load balanced workers

2005-03-26 Thread Mladen Turk
Mathias Herberts wrote: Now that I think more of that, you can use the Apache's 'LimitRequestLine' directive (default 8190), so this won't get to the mod_jk at first. this will indeed fix some cases, but the AJP13 packet can still be filled up by adding junk headers to the request, Apache does not

Re: Behaviour of mod_jk AJP 1.3 load balanced workers

2005-03-25 Thread Mathias Herberts
Hi Mladen, Now that I think more of that, you can use the Apache's 'LimitRequestLine' directive (default 8190), so this won't get to the mod_jk at first. this will indeed fix some cases, but the AJP13 packet can still be filled up by adding junk headers to the request, Apache does not take heade

Re: Behaviour of mod_jk AJP 1.3 load balanced workers

2005-03-25 Thread Mladen Turk
Mathias Herberts wrote: Hi, Some of the applications we are hosting make heavy use of HTML Forms using GET as the submission method. From time to time, a form text input field will be big (above 8kb) making the AJP 1.3 packet too big and thus Now that I think more of that, you can use the Apach

Re: Behaviour of mod_jk AJP 1.3 load balanced workers

2005-03-25 Thread Mladen Turk
Yes, that makes sense, since it's not Tomcat nor transport error. I'll fix that ASAP. This is actually a bug since the return value should be OK with proper HTTP status code (in this case BAD_REQUEST). Regards, Mladen. Mathias Herberts wrote: Hi, we are using Tomcat as our application server with f

Behaviour of mod_jk AJP 1.3 load balanced workers

2005-03-25 Thread Mathias Herberts
Hi, we are using Tomcat as our application server with front end Apache servers (1.3.33) running mod_jk from Jakarta Tomcat Connectors 1.2.8. We have load balancing workers which load balance ajp13 workers. Some of the applications we are hosting make heavy use of HTML Forms using GET as the sub