Kind Regards RMG
-- Roger Goudarzi Email: rog...@arkasoft.com WWW: http://www.Arkasoft.com T:+1-(408)-660-3635 F:+1-(408)-493-4576 UK: +44-779-461-5892 On Aug 11, 2014, at 10:31, users-digest-h...@httpd.apache.org wrote: > > users Digest 11 Aug 2014 09:31:29 -0000 Issue 4870 > > Topics (messages 109854 through 109854) > > unsubscribe > 109854 by: Roger Goudarzi > > Administrivia: > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To post to the list, e-mail: users@httpd.apache.org > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-digest-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-digest-h...@httpd.apache.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > From: Roger Goudarzi <rog...@arkasoft.com> > Subject: unsubscribe > Date: August 11, 2014 at 10:30:58 GMT+1 > To: users@httpd.apache.org > > > > > Kind Regards > RMG > > -- > Roger Goudarzi > Email: rog...@arkasoft.com > WWW: http://www.Arkasoft.com > T:+1-(408)-660-3635 > F:+1-(408)-493-4576 > UK: +44-779-461-5892 > > > > On Aug 11, 2014, at 10:27, users-digest-h...@httpd.apache.org wrote: > >> >> users Digest 11 Aug 2014 09:27:27 -0000 Issue 4869 >> >> Topics (messages 109829 through 109853) >> >> Re: Use Allow from IP when there is a proxy exist? >> 109829 by: Pete Houston >> 109830 by: Igor Cicimov >> 109831 by: Mark jensen >> 109832 by: Igor Cicimov >> 109833 by: Tom Evans >> 109836 by: Igor Cicimov >> >> Rewrite and automount question >> 109834 by: Rose, John B >> 109839 by: Rose, John B >> 109840 by: Rich Bowen >> 109843 by: Rose, John B >> 109845 by: Nick Kew >> >> Re: Windows Apache 2.4.9 restarts itself >> 109835 by: Jeff Trawick >> 109846 by: Jeff Trawick >> >> Apache.org server-status >> 109837 by: Rose, John B >> 109838 by: Jeff Trawick >> >> Re: ApacheCon CFP closes June 25 >> 109841 by: Rich Bowen >> >> Re: Order of applicatoin of sites-enabled configs >> 109842 by: Rich Bowen >> >> How to forbid browsers to cache some pages? >> 109844 by: Mark jensen >> 109847 by: fedora >> 109848 by: Mark jensen >> >> Apache 2.2:How to enable module: mod_expires.c >> 109849 by: Mark jensen >> 109850 by: Eric Covener >> 109851 by: Mark jensen >> 109852 by: Pete Houston >> >> SSL Library Error: error:2D06D075:FIPS >> routines:fips_pkey_signature_test:test failure (Type=RSA SHA1 X931) >> 109853 by: Abdul Anshad >> >> Administrivia: >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To post to the list, e-mail: users@httpd.apache.org >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-digest-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-digest-h...@httpd.apache.org >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> From: Pete Houston <p...@openstrike.co.uk> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Use Allow from IP when there is a proxy exist? >> Date: August 7, 2014 at 22:49:55 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 09:19:10PM +0000, Mark jensen wrote: >>> How can I make Apache to deal with the client IP not the proxy IP? >> >> Use mod_remoteip. >> >> Pete >> -- >> Openstrike - improving business through open source >> http://www.openstrike.co.uk/ or call 01722 770036 / 07092 020107 >> >> >> >> From: Igor Cicimov <icici...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Use Allow from IP when there is a proxy exist? >> Date: August 7, 2014 at 22:56:26 GMT+1 >> To: users <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> >> > But what if we use proxy (squid) in front, then the source IP will be the >> > proxy IP, How can I make Apache to deal with the client IP not the proxy >> > IP? >> > >> You mean tell squid to send the source ip to apache? Check squid >> documentation how to do that or set proxy-for header. What can apache do >> about something it doesnt know about? >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Mark jensen <ngiw2...@hotmail.com> >> Subject: RE: [users@httpd] Use Allow from IP when there is a proxy exist? >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 2:15:50 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> I have found something like that, iS it true to use it: >> >> Your .htaccess file: >> # ALLOW USER BY IP >> order deny,allow >> deny from all >> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "1.2.3.4" AllowIP >> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "5.6.7.8" AllowIP >> Allow from env=AllowIP >> allow from 1.2.3.4 >> allow from 5.6.7.8source: >> http://frustratedtech.com/post/42641261089/htaccess-file-to-block-ips-coming-from-varnish >> >> >> >> From: Igor Cicimov <icici...@gmail.com> >> Subject: RE: [users@httpd] Use Allow from IP when there is a proxy exist? >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 9:23:40 GMT+1 >> To: users <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> >> > Your .htaccess file: >> > # ALLOW USER BY IP >> > order deny,allow >> > deny from all >> > SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "1.2.3.4" AllowIP >> > SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "5.6.7.8" AllowIP >> > Allow from env=AllowIP >> > allow from 1.2.3.4 >> > allow from 5.6.7.8source: >> > http://frustratedtech.com/post/42641261089/htaccess-file-to-block-ips-coming-from-varnish >> > >> Looks sane to me although don't see the need for the last 2 allow since they >> are already included by the previous "Allow from env=AllowIP". You can also >> use regexp like: >> >> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "1.2.3.4|5.6.7.8|7.8.9.[2-5]|3.4.5.[69]" AllowIP >> >> just as example. >> >> >> >> From: Tom Evans <tevans...@googlemail.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Use Allow from IP when there is a proxy exist? >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 14:20:50 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Igor Cicimov <icici...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Your .htaccess file: >>>> # ALLOW USER BY IP >>>> order deny,allow >>>> deny from all >>>> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "1.2.3.4" AllowIP >>>> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "5.6.7.8" AllowIP >>>> Allow from env=AllowIP >>>> allow from 1.2.3.4 >>>> allow from 5.6.7.8source: >>>> http://frustratedtech.com/post/42641261089/htaccess-file-to-block-ips-coming-from-varnish >>>> >>> Looks sane to me although don't see the need for the last 2 allow since they >>> are already included by the previous "Allow from env=AllowIP". You can also >>> use regexp like: >>> >>> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "1.2.3.4|5.6.7.8|7.8.9.[2-5]|3.4.5.[69]" AllowIP >>> >> >> Looks insane to me. If squid is setting X-Forwarded-For and you trust >> squid, use mod_remoteip or mod_rpaf2 so that apache knows the real >> client address and will use it in authentication and logging. >> >> Using string matching, or even worse, regexp matching on >> X-Forwarded-For is a mistake as it is error prone - you must specify >> your authentication as a string or regexp, not as it's native type - >> and worse it is potentially malicious as squid does not scrub >> X-Forwarded-For, it appends to it, making your simple string match >> easily exploitable. >> >> mod_remoteip and mod_rpaf both know about X-Forwarded-For, they allow >> you to specify which hosts you trust to add X-Forwarded-For, and they >> interpret the X-Forwarded-For correctly as an IP address, allowing you >> to specify your configuration in it's natural form. >> >> Cheers >> >> Tom >> >> >> >> >> From: Igor Cicimov <icici...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Use Allow from IP when there is a proxy exist? >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 15:40:47 GMT+1 >> To: users <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> >> On 08/08/2014 11:21 PM, "Tom Evans" <tevans...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Igor Cicimov <icici...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >> Your .htaccess file: >> > >> # ALLOW USER BY IP >> > >> order deny,allow >> > >> deny from all >> > >> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "1.2.3.4" AllowIP >> > >> SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "5.6.7.8" AllowIP >> > >> Allow from env=AllowIP >> > >> allow from 1.2.3.4 >> > >> allow from 5.6.7.8source: >> > >> http://frustratedtech.com/post/42641261089/htaccess-file-to-block-ips-coming-from-varnish >> > >> >> > > Looks sane to me although don't see the need for the last 2 allow since >> > > they >> > > are already included by the previous "Allow from env=AllowIP". You can >> > > also >> > > use regexp like: >> > > >> > > SetEnvIF X-Forwarded-For "1.2.3.4|5.6.7.8|7.8.9.[2-5]|3.4.5.[69]" AllowIP >> > > >> > >> > Looks insane to me. If squid is setting X-Forwarded-For and you trust >> > squid, use mod_remoteip or mod_rpaf2 so that apache knows the real >> > client address and will use it in authentication and logging. >> > >> > Using string matching, or even worse, regexp matching on >> > X-Forwarded-For is a mistake as it is error prone - you must specify >> > your authentication as a string or regexp, not as it's native type - >> > and worse it is potentially malicious as squid does not scrub >> > X-Forwarded-For, it appends to it, making your simple string match >> > easily exploitable. >> > >> >> Not if you use "forward-for truncate" >> >> > mod_remoteip and mod_rpaf both know about X-Forwarded-For, they allow >> > you to specify which hosts you trust to add X-Forwarded-For, and they >> > interpret the X-Forwarded-For correctly as an IP address, allowing you >> > to specify your configuration in it's natural form. >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > Tom >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@httpd.apache.org >> > >> >> >> >> From: "Rose, John B" <jbr...@utk.edu> >> Subject: Rewrite and automount question >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 14:51:56 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> We have experimented with using Rewrite to replace /~someuser with /someuser >> >> However there is a problem with systems using automounter in the case of an >> http request for a non-existing http://someserver.com/someuser >> >> Anyone have a way to implement the above without doing undesired automount >> attempts of a non-existent "someuser"? >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> >> >> From: "Rose, John B" <jbr...@utk.edu> >> Subject: Re: Rewrite and automount question >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 16:59:20 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> mod_userdir does not seem to cause superfluous automounter attempts when an >> http request to a non-existent web address, http://website.com/~someuser, is >> received >> >> Is there some way to implement that mechanism with >> http://website.com/someuser http requests for a nonexistent "someuser"? >> >> From: <Rose>, John Rose <jbr...@utk.edu> >> Date: Friday, August 8, 2014 9:51 AM >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> Subject: Rewrite and automount question >> >> We have experimented with using Rewrite to replace /~someuser with /someuser >> >> However there is a problem with systems using automounter in the case of an >> http request for a non-existing http://someserver.com/someuser >> >> Anyone have a way to implement the above without doing undesired automount >> attempts of a non-existent "someuser"? >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Re: Rewrite and automount question >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 20:24:44 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> >> On 08/08/2014 11:59 AM, Rose, John B wrote: >>> mod_userdir does not seem to cause superfluous automounter attempts when an >>> http request to a non-existent web address, http://website.com/~someuser, >>> is received >>> >>> Is there some way to implement that mechanism with >>> http://website.com/someuser http requests for a nonexistent "someuser"? >> >> What's automounter? Is that some process that mounts a user's home directory >> on a remote share or something? >> >> I suppose you could query a list of valid users on server startup, and use >> that (via mod_macro or something?) to generate a list of Alias directives? >> Or possibly use a RewriteMap to do the same thing based on a list of users, >> although RewriteMap can be a bit of a performance bottleneck. >> >> --Rich >> >> >>> >>> From: <Rose>, John Rose <jbr...@utk.edu> >>> Date: Friday, August 8, 2014 9:51 AM >>> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >>> Subject: Rewrite and automount question >>> >>> We have experimented with using Rewrite to replace /~someuser with /someuser >>> >>> However there is a problem with systems using automounter in the case of an >>> http request for a non-existing http://someserver.com/someuser >>> >>> Anyone have a way to implement the above without doing undesired automount >>> attempts of a non-existent "someuser"? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen >> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon >> >> >> >> From: "Rose, John B" <jbr...@utk.edu> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Re: Rewrite and automount question >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 20:40:18 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> "What's automounter? Is that some process that mounts a user's home >> directory on a remote share or something?" >> >> Yes. But only when it is requested. I.e. When you login via ssh, or access a >> web site via http whose content is in the remote filesystem, etc. You may >> refer to it as autofs. >> >> >> From: Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> >> Reply-To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> Date: Friday, August 8, 2014 3:24 PM >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Re: Rewrite and automount question >> >> >> On 08/08/2014 11:59 AM, Rose, John B wrote: >>> mod_userdir does not seem to cause superfluous automounter attempts when an >>> http request to a non-existent web address, http://website.com/~someuser, >>> is received >>> >>> Is there some way to implement that mechanism with >>> http://website.com/someuser http requests for a nonexistent "someuser"? >> >> What's automounter? Is that some process that mounts a user's home directory >> on a remote share or something? >> >> I suppose you could query a list of valid users on server startup, and use >> that (via mod_macro or something?) to generate a list of Alias directives? >> Or possibly use a RewriteMap to do the same thing based on a list of users, >> although RewriteMap can be a bit of a performance bottleneck. >> >> --Rich >> >> >>> >>> From: <Rose>, John Rose <jbr...@utk.edu> >>> Date: Friday, August 8, 2014 9:51 AM >>> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >>> Subject: Rewrite and automount question >>> >>> We have experimented with using Rewrite to replace /~someuser with /someuser >>> >>> However there is a problem with systems using automounter in the case of an >>> http request for a non-existing http://someserver.com/someuser >>> >>> Anyone have a way to implement the above without doing undesired automount >>> attempts of a non-existent "someuser"? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen >> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon >> >> >> >> From: Nick Kew <n...@webthing.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Rewrite and automount question >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 22:36:43 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> >> On 8 Aug 2014, at 14:51, Rose, John B wrote: >> >>> We have experimented with using Rewrite to replace /~someuser with /someuser >> >> How very 1997. >> >>> However there is a problem with systems using automounter in the case of an >>> http request for a non-existing http://someserver.com/someuser >> >> That's your filesystem. Apache has no knowledge of whether a directory >> exists until it performs a lookup. And it's the lookup that triggers the >> automount. >> Check your NFS options. >> >> Using NFS with apache - or anywhere exposed to the public 'net - >> is not encouraged. Not good for either security or performance. >> >>> Anyone have a way to implement the above without doing undesired automount >>> attempts of a non-existent "someuser"? >> >> Most simply, make sure AllowOverride is set to None. >> >> You could also see if mod_cache helps, and if it doesn't >> then you've diagnosed a major inefficiency in your server. >> But mod_cache will only reduce, not eliminate, NFS accesses. >> >> -- >> Nick Kew >> >> >> >> From: Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Windows Apache 2.4.9 restarts itself >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 15:21:37 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Agnetta Kamugisha >> <kamugis...@nccommunitycolleges.edu> wrote: >> Jeff, >> >> Check this link. >> >> We had to implement this workaround. >> https://www.apachelounge.com/viewtopic.php?t=6037 >> >> FWIW, AH00344 after AH00356 shouldn't be interesting. The listening socket >> got closed as part of shutting down after the original problem. I hope to >> improve logging of that in the shutdown scenario so that people don't worry >> about that. >> >> This "netsh winsock reset" hint is interesting. With the report we have on >> 2.4.10, which tells us which handle goes bad (thus triggering AH00356), the >> bad handle is a rather generic handle. (CreateEvent(NULL, TRUE, FALSE, >> NULL);) >> >> When, or how often, do you need to use "netsh winsock reset"? >> >> Please confirm that you were seeing AH00356 without "netsh winsock reset". >> >> (I can imagine that there are situations with third-party winsock layers >> where "netsh winsock reset" helps with the AH00344 error which doesn't come >> right after the AH00356 error.) >> >> Thanks! >> >> >> >> From: Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Windows Apache 2.4.9 restarts itself >> Date: August 9, 2014 at 1:34:03 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Agnetta Kamugisha >> <kamugis...@nccommunitycolleges.edu> wrote: >> Jeff, >> >> Check this link. >> >> We had to implement this workaround. >> https://www.apachelounge.com/viewtopic.php?t=6037 >> >> FWIW, AH00344 after AH00356 shouldn't be interesting. The listening socket >> got closed as part of shutting down after the original problem. I hope to >> improve logging of that in the shutdown scenario so that people don't worry >> about that. >> >> This "netsh winsock reset" hint is interesting. With the report we have on >> 2.4.10, which tells us which handle goes bad (thus triggering AH00356), the >> bad handle is a rather generic handle. (CreateEvent(NULL, TRUE, FALSE, >> NULL);) >> >> When, or how often, do you need to use "netsh winsock reset"? >> >> Uhh, for those trying this, be aware that after doing that it says to >> restart the computer ;) >> >> >> Please confirm that you were seeing AH00356 without "netsh winsock reset". >> >> (I can imagine that there are situations with third-party winsock layers >> where "netsh winsock reset" helps with the AH00344 error which doesn't come >> right after the AH00356 error.) >> >> Thanks! >> >> >> >> -- >> Born in Roswell... married an alien... >> http://emptyhammock.com/ >> http://edjective.org/ >> >> >> >> >> From: "Rose, John B" <jbr...@utk.edu> >> Subject: Apache.org server-status >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 15:56:06 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> Looking at the apache.org server-status I do not see any of these … >> >> "OPTIONS * HTTP/1.0" >> >> In the "Request" column >> >> While I see quite a few in ours. >> >> Why does apache.org not have any of these entries? >> >> thanks >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Apache.org server-status >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 16:02:51 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Rose, John B <jbr...@utk.edu> wrote: >> Looking at the apache.org server-status I do not see any of these … >> >> "OPTIONS * HTTP/1.0" >> >> In the "Request" column >> >> While I see quite a few in ours. >> >> Why does apache.org not have any of these entries? >> >> thanks >> >> >> >> You're using prefork MPM and your configuration >> (MinSpareServers/MaxSpareServers/etc.) results in child processes being >> created and destroyed on a somewhat regular basis? >> >> The prefork MPM will wake up processes with an OPTIONS request as part of >> process management. >> >> apache.org runs the event MPM. >> >> >> -- >> Born in Roswell... married an alien... >> http://emptyhammock.com/ >> http://edjective.org/ >> >> >> >> >> From: Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] ApacheCon CFP closes June 25 >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 20:26:31 GMT+1 >> To: "J.Lance Wilkinson" <jl...@psu.edu> >> Cc: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> >> On 08/06/2014 01:18 PM, J.Lance Wilkinson wrote: >>> Rich Bowen wrote: >>>> >>>> On 06/16/2014 11:06 AM, J.Lance Wilkinson wrote: >>> ...snip... >>>>> Those of us at edu sites sometimes need to put in for travel/training >>>>> funding as much as a year in advance, and my own institution's >>>>> budgeting process cuts of June 30th for the Fiscal Year 2014-2015. >>>> >>> ...snip... >>>> ACNA 2015 will be in roughly the same timeframe as ACNA 2014 was (ie, >>>> April) and we're currently working on locations. I'll be announcing dates >>>> and location at ACEU, at the very latest. Hopefully well before then. >>> >>> Anything firmer yet besides "roughly April 2015" for those of us who >>> desperately need to put in for funding? >> >> I should have a firm answer to this (which will be announced on this list, >> among other places) within the next week, or two at most. >> >> >> -- >> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen >> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Order of applicatoin of sites-enabled configs >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 20:31:24 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> >> On 08/07/2014 05:16 PM, M Busche wrote: >>> Frank, >>> >>> I don't think you understood what I was trying to say. My complaint was >>> that in the pre-packaged configuration made with the ubuntu distribution, >>> the default vhost configuration is placed in a file prefixed with the >>> string 000 which causes it to be loaded first. I renamed it to have a >>> prefix 999, so that it was loaded (and processed) last. >> >> Note that 999 still comes before abc, so you might consider zzz instead of >> 999 in order to avoid the same surprise later. >> >>> I think we are in complete agreement. My original query was to find out >>> whether there was something I was confused about, or alternatively an >>> explanation as to why-on-earth the people who put together the ubuntu >>> distribution would set things up that way. >>> >>> >> >> The short answer is that Debian did this in order to make it easier to do >> stuff from the command line with the various utilities that they ship with >> their Apache httpd packages. The longer answer has to do with how good ideas >> mutate into complicated systems over the decades. >> >> -- >> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen >> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon >> >> >> >> From: Mark jensen <ngiw2...@hotmail.com> >> Subject: How to forbid browsers to cache some pages? >> Date: August 8, 2014 at 22:11:24 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> How to configure Apache to want to forbid browsers from caching all web >> pages in www1.example.com/public >> and in www1.example.com/books so every time I ask the browser about any page >> it brings it from source. >> but I want it to cache the pages under: www1.example.com? >> >> >> >> From: fedora <fed...@ayni.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] How to forbid browsers to cache some pages? >> Date: August 9, 2014 at 5:59:28 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> I thought there was a <META ...> Tag in HTML, something linke NO-CACHE. >> Whether the browsers respect it, is another question... >> >> suomi >> >> >> On 2014-08-08 23:11, Mark jensen wrote: >>> How to configure Apache to want to forbid browsers from caching all web >>> pages in www1.example.com/public >>> and in www1.example.com/books so every time I ask the browser about any >>> page it brings it from source. >>> but I want it to cache the pages under: www1.example.com? >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@httpd.apache.org >>> >> >> >> >> >> From: Mark jensen <ngiw2...@hotmail.com> >> Subject: RE: [users@httpd] How to forbid browsers to cache some pages? >> Date: August 9, 2014 at 13:42:57 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> I have found a good tutorial for my goal: >> >> http://support.tigertech.net/prevent-caching >> >> >> >> From: Mark jensen <ngiw2...@hotmail.com> >> Subject: Apache 2.2:How to enable module: mod_expires.c >> Date: August 9, 2014 at 15:04:15 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> doing httpd -l returns: >> >> core.c >> prefork.c >> http_core.c >> mod_so.c >> >> How to enable the mod_expires module? >> >> >> >> From: Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Apache 2.2:How to enable module: mod_expires.c >> Date: August 9, 2014 at 15:09:34 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> Load it with LoadModule >> >> (use -M to show dynamically loaded modules.) >> >> On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Mark jensen <ngiw2...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> doing httpd -l returns: >>> >>> core.c >>> prefork.c >>> http_core.c >>> mod_so.c >>> >>> How to enable the mod_expires module? >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Eric Covener >> cove...@gmail.com >> >> >> >> >> From: Mark jensen <ngiw2...@hotmail.com> >> Subject: RE: [users@httpd] Apache 2.2:How to enable module: mod_expires.c >> Date: August 9, 2014 at 15:14:36 GMT+1 >> To: "users@httpd.apache.org" <users@httpd.apache.org> >> >> >> Doing httpd -M | grep expire: >> >> expires_module (shared) >> Syntax OK >> >> and I have found this line in conf file: >> >> LoadModule expires module modules/mod_expires.so >> >> but "ExpireDefault" didn't work >> >> >> >> From: Pete Houston <p...@openstrike.co.uk> >> Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Apache 2.2:How to enable module: mod_expires.c >> Date: August 9, 2014 at 16:22:18 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 02:14:36PM +0000, Mark jensen wrote: >>> and I have found this line in conf file: >>> >>> LoadModule expires module modules/mod_expires.so >>> >>> but "ExpireDefault" didn't work >> >> There's no such directive in Apache 2.2 as "ExpireDefault". Perhaps if >> you tried "ExpiresDefault" you might have more success. Note that it >> takes an argument, so using it without one should still result in a >> syntax error. >> >> Pete >> -- >> Openstrike - improving business through open source >> http://www.openstrike.co.uk/ or call 01722 770036 / 07092 020107 >> >> >> >> From: Abdul Anshad <ab...@visolve.com> >> Subject: SSL Library Error: error:2D06D075:FIPS >> routines:fips_pkey_signature_test:test failure (Type=RSA SHA1 X931) >> Date: August 11, 2014 at 10:26:44 GMT+1 >> To: users@httpd.apache.org >> >> >> Hello All, >> >> I have a set up which runs Apache http-2.4.10 and openssl-1.0.1i, when I try >> to start the http server with FIPS mode i get the following error. >> >> [Mon Aug 11 14:39:24.407781 2014] [suexec:notice] [pid 380] AH01232: suEXEC >> mechanism enabled (wrapper: /apps/apache/2.4.10/bin/suexec) >> [Mon Aug 11 14:39:24.428616 2014] [ssl:emerg] [pid 380] AH01885: FIPS mode >> failed >> [Mon Aug 11 14:39:24.428656 2014] [ssl:emerg] [pid 380] SSL Library Error: >> error:2D06D075:FIPS routines:fips_pkey_signature_test:test failure (Type=RSA >> SHA1 X931) >> [Mon Aug 11 14:39:24.428663 2014] [ssl:emerg] [pid 380] AH02312: Fatal error >> initialising mod_ssl, exiting. >> AH00016: Configuration Failed >> >> Could somebody help me out with this issue ? Thanks in advance. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Abdul >> >> --- >> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus >> protection is active. >> http://www.avast.com >> >> >> >> > > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
