thanks for your help. i don't think the problem is the syntax of the
configuration. i have submitted a bug on bz.apache.org and have already
been in communication with a developer there who has helped me figure it
out. in case it helps someone else it looks like it might be a clash
with
The docs say you should use
ProxyPass "!"
Or
ProxyPass "/.well-known/" "!"
I do think the second one is more clear, but they both use double quotes on
the ! marker, have you tried to put the double quotes?
BUT reading a bit more I found this:
For the same reasons, exclusions must come
hi,
i know this is a community list but i have had this problem for a long
time and it seems really fundamental. is there any way i can get some
help on this? shall i file a bug report at JIRA or something?
On 10/03/2017 17:43, Matthew Broadhead wrote:
i moved the LogLevel directive to
i moved the LogLevel directive to httpd.conf and now i get this
[Fri Mar 10 16:41:21.491354 2017] [proxy:debug] [pid 18744]
proxy_util.c(1936): AH00931: initialized single connection worker in
child 18744 for (*)
[Fri Mar 10 16:41:21.496525 2017] [proxy:debug] [pid 18745]
proxy_util.c(1885):
i also added this in the virtual host
LogLevel info proxy:debug
but it makes no difference to the output in error_log
On 10/03/2017 16:48, Eric Covener wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Matthew Broadhead
wrote:
yes it is definitely because of that line.
i was looking at this message http://markmail.org/message/ne2rdzm5westbcvb
well it doesn't work either way in my case. is there any way to test
mod_proxy to find out why it isn't working? when i first moved to
CentOS 7 i used an old configuration which worked perfectly on CentOS 6
but i
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Matthew Broadhead
wrote:
> yes it is definitely because of that line. i also just tried
>
> ProxyPass ajp://www.nbmlaw.co.uk:8010/
>
>
> ProxyPass !
>
> and that has exactly the same effect
That syntax is known to not work.
yes it is definitely because of that line. i also just tried
ProxyPass ajp://www.nbmlaw.co.uk:8010/
ProxyPass !
and that has exactly the same effect
On 10/03/2017 16:30, Eric Covener wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Matthew Broadhead
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Matthew Broadhead
wrote:
> Declaring the following directives in a virtual host
> ProxyPass "/.well-known/" ! # don't pass lets encrypt folder
> ProxyPass "/" ajp://localhost:8010/ # pass root to tomcat server
>
Operating System:
CentOS7
Operating System Version number:
centos-release-7-3.1611.el7.centos.x86_64
Httpd Version:
httpd-2.4.6-45.el7.centos.x86_64
Issue:
Declaring the following directives in a virtual host
ProxyPass "/.well-known/" ! # don't pass lets encrypt folder
ProxyPass "/"
Hi Matthew,
are you upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4?
Moreover, I'd use https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/core.html#loglevel
for mod_proxy to get more data about what's happening. The httpd version is
also a bit old (upstream is 2.4.18 now and Debian for example has 2.4.10 in
stable).
Luca
hi,
i am still experiencing this problem. does anyone know what might
possibly cause this?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@httpd.apache.org
FYI
server: centos-release-7-2.1511.el7.centos.2.10.x86_64
httpd: httpd-2.4.6-40.el7.centos.x86_64
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@httpd.apache.org
I am in the middle of migrating a server and my old virtual host config
which worked fine was like this
|ProxyPass /images ! ProxyPass / ajp://domain.tld:8010/ nocanon |
It passes ok to Tomcat but the ! directive is being ignored. There are
no errors thrown. What might be causing this?
I'm using Apache to front-end some servers listening on loopback but the
ProxyPass directive doesn't like IPv6 addresses.
I spin up a server on IPv6 address [::1]:8001, confirmed working using cURL
and shown here on nestat:
tcp0 0 ::1:8001:::*
LISTEN
Hello all
I'mt trying to use the max option configuring a ProxyPass directive, but it
seems that it has no effect. I'm testing with a new installation, so you will
find that I am using a reduced size for threads, childs, etc
I am using HTTP 2.2.23 with mpm worker. The most important
16 matches
Mail list logo