Frank,
thanks. I looked at the compatibility and that does not look too good as
we have loads of people using IE7 and XP, not sure ... it looks good, though.
Our company uses Firefox 3.68 so thats not the problem but I have
online questionnaires that rely on the https stuff, and lots of our
...is it possible that mod_deflate works by chunks...
Why are you doing this? It's not to increase client-side performance because
correct me if I'm wrong here but it's been my
understanding that the web browser cannot start decompressing the page until it
receives the final chunk. Based on
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Geoff Millikan
gmilli...@t1shopper.com wrote:
...is it possible that mod_deflate works by chunks...
Why are you doing this? It's not to increase client-side performance because
correct me if I'm wrong here but it's been my
understanding that the web
Goal is to get the HEAD of HTML documents in the client side as soon
as possible ...thus having a more responsive page...
Agreed!
Can anyone confirm or deny this...
+1
I ran a quick test on a 10MB file that looks like this:
htmlhead
link rel=stylesheet href=broken_link_here.css
My test showed (according to Firebug) that the 15 MB
page downloaded in 618ms.
Should clarify that on disk, the page was 14,254,523 bytes but after deflating,
I downloaded a mere 314 bytes of headers
(uncompressed) plus the 41,841 byte response body (compressed) for a total
payload of
Now finally able to host a website on my home static-IP ADSL connection, using
Linux (FC-14) apache httpd-2.2.17-1.fc14.x86_64 ,
with IP-passthrough and Full NAT enabled on the ADSL router so it assigns
my host its own WAN address ,
I'm seeing these strange entries in the access log :
Jason,
Congratulations. You are the likely target of a kiddie script attempting a
buffer overflow or dot dot variant. Check your error logs and your access
logs to ensure that the attempts were not successful. You can expect 10-20
of these attacks per day.
Larry
Dr. Larry Burton
Associate
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 15:16:00 Larry W Burton wrote:
Jason,
Congratulations. You are the likely target of a kiddie script attempting a
buffer overflow or dot dot variant. Check your error logs and your access
logs to ensure that the attempts were not successful. You can expect 10-20
of these
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jason Vas Dias
jason.vas.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess this is just opportunist hosts trying to connect to port 80 / port
443 with a garbage protocol ?
If so, why are log entries made in the access log and not in the error log ?
Jason, this looks like a host
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 15:37:17 Ben Timby wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jason Vas Dias
jason.vas.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess this is just opportunist hosts trying to connect to port 80 / port
443 with a garbage protocol ?
If so, why are log entries made in the access log and
I'm new to Apache to my environment too.
We run 4 Apache V2.0.52 I've seeing high load averages (of 3 to 13)
reported by top on the Linux RHES 4.6 for the 1, 5 15 minutes avgs
on 3 of our webservers. All the servers' CPU are generally idle except
one webserver which sometimes hit 90-100% CPU
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Jason Vas Dias
jason.vas.d...@gmail.comwrote:
But I had the impression from reading the documentation that the
access_log was to
record actual ACCESSes , ie. for requests that at least pass the is a
valid HTTP request test ,
and that non-requests, if logged
Thanks a lot Geoff. Can you provide some more information to be able
to reproduce your test over here? And how many chunks did the response
contain?
In addition to that, if someone with first-hand knowledge of Apache or
browser internals could shed a light I'd really appreciate it. Reverse
Can you provide some more information to be able
to reproduce your test over here?
Just make a web page like the one described. Enable mod_deflate and load the
page in your favorite browser that has debugging
(Firebug, IE9, Chrome, etc). In my case, it appears Apache selects the chunked
14 matches
Mail list logo
