On 11/08/2012 05:11 AM, easyboy wrote:
I am new to the apache mods. I just writing up a new mod with content handler
to set cookies in request http header. I was able to load this mod.
I need this mod process the request header before mod_jk.
I'd suggest mod_proxy_ajp instead of mod_jk - the
On Wednesday 07 November 2012 22:16:46 Graham Leggett wrote:
On 07 Nov 2012, at 10:35 PM, André Malo n...@perlig.de wrote:
It feels wrong targeting 0.9 only, would it be possible to do this in a
generic way, say by listing the ones accepted, or by specifying a
minimum?
Hmm, what would
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Tim Bannister wrote:
On 7 Nov 2012, at 11:26, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
If a method is not registered, bail out early.
Good idea, but it would be nice to be able to use Limit or LimitExcept to
re-allow it.
I intended to add a directive to easily register custom methods
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Tim Bannister wrote:
On 7 Nov 2012, at 18:12, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Graham Leggett wrote:
New directive HttpProtocol which allows to disable HTTP/0.9 support.
It feels wrong targeting 0.9 only, would it be possible to do this in a generic
way, say by
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Graham Leggett wrote:
On 07 Nov 2012, at 8:12 PM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote:
Any suggestions for a syntax? Maybe:
HttpProtocol 1.1# only 1.1
HttpProtocol 1.0- # 1.0 and above
HttpProtocol 1.0-1.1# 1.0 and 1.1
HttpProtocol -1.0 # 1.0 and
What about mod_security, has a lot of similar checks and even more.
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Fritsch
Sent: Wednesday, November 7, 2012 12:26 Newsgroups: gmane.comp.apache.devel
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Rethinking be liberal in what you accept
Hi,
considering the
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:47:31AM +0100, Apache Lounge wrote:
What about mod_security, has a lot of similar checks and even more.
ModSec can perform all these checks via regexes, but it bears a
certain overhead in performance and administration. The protocol
checks are part of bigger rulesets
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 11:18:37 +0100 (CET)
Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote:
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Tim Bannister wrote:
On 7 Nov 2012, at 11:26, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
If a method is not registered, bail out early.
Good idea, but it would be nice to be able to use Limit or LimitExcept
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 08:44:21AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
I went ahead and committed this to trunk as r1389339. Hopefully this
completes the ability to enable mpm-itk without patches to httpd core.
I've looked at this now; sorry for the long delay. It would seem it is not
sufficient for
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:51:50PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
I've looked at this now; sorry for the long delay. It would seem it is not
sufficient for removing the patches from server/config.c (which exit if
.htaccess files cannot be opened); or am I misunderstanding something?
Sorry,
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:53:12PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
I've looked at this now; sorry for the long delay. It would seem it is not
sufficient for removing the patches from server/config.c (which exit if
.htaccess files cannot be opened); or am I misunderstanding something?
Sorry,
On Thursday 08 November 2012, Nick Kew wrote:
I intended to add a directive to easily register custom methods
(i.e. call ap_method_register()). Do you think there is reason
to allow arbitrary methods, and not just a configured list of
allowed ones?
If methods are to be actively
12 matches
Mail list logo
