Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/22/2015 04:50 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Andy Wang <aw...@ptc.com> wrote: Tested with the patch and looks good. Not that much actually, the patch fails to consume the CRLFs, and hence can end up in an infinite loop. So I'm attaching a new on

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/22/2015 10:31 AM, Andy Wang wrote: On 10/22/2015 10:06 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: Does it make a difference with "AcceptFilter http none" configured? It shouldn't, but since we are in the x-files... I already had to do that. We have this weird scenario where when our installe

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

ng a 0x0a to the end of it but it doesn't recreate the problem. Andy On 10/22/2015 08:59 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Andy Wang <aw...@ptc.com <mailto:aw...@ptc.com>> wrote: On 10/21/2015 10:01 AM, Andy Wang wrote:

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/21/2015 10:01 AM, Andy Wang wrote: I will do that today. And thank you to Rudiger and yourself, and everyone else on the thread for all the help. I missed the trailing 0x0a in the different wireshark captures. I was trusting wireshark's http dissection rather than looking at the raw

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/22/2015 10:06 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: Does it make a difference with "AcceptFilter http none" configured? It shouldn't, but since we are in the x-files... I already had to do that. We have this weird scenario where when our installer installs httpd, httpd hangs. Packet captures show

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/22/2015 10:38 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: On 22 Oct 2015, at 5:31 PM, Andy Wang <aw...@ptc.com> wrote: I already had to do that. We have this weird scenario where when our installer installs httpd, httpd hangs. Packet captures show the request arriving but no ACK or an

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/22/2015 10:52 AM, Andy Wang wrote: On 10/22/2015 10:38 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: On 22 Oct 2015, at 5:31 PM, Andy Wang <aw...@ptc.com> wrote: I already had to do that. We have this weird scenario where when our installer installs httpd, httpd hangs. Packet capture

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/21/2015 09:31 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: OK, thanks :) Andy, can you give the proposed patch a try? I will do that today. And thank you to Rudiger and yourself, and everyone else on the thread for all the help. I missed the trailing 0x0a in the different wireshark captures. I was

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/21/2015 09:54 AM, Andy Wang wrote: On 10/21/2015 09:31 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: OK, thanks :) Andy, can you give the proposed patch a try? I will do that today. And thank you to Rudiger and yourself, and everyone else on the thread for all the help. I missed the trailing 0x0a

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/20/2015 05:19 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: mod_dumpio's traces (level TRACE7) could be helpful here, Andy? I'll reconfigure to get that in a bit today. I'll also try with mod_proxy_ajp as well to see if the same occurs. Thanks, Andy

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/20/2015 11:16 AM, Andy Wang wrote: On 10/20/2015 05:19 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: mod_dumpio's traces (level TRACE7) could be helpful here, Andy? I'll reconfigure to get that in a bit today. I'll also try with mod_proxy_ajp as well to see if the same occurs. mod_proxy_ajp has

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/20/2015 02:57 PM, Andy Wang wrote: On 10/20/2015 11:16 AM, Andy Wang wrote: On 10/20/2015 05:19 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: mod_dumpio's traces (level TRACE7) could be helpful here, Andy? I'll reconfigure to get that in a bit today. I'll also try with mod_proxy_ajp as well to see

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/19/2015 06:05 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: [From users@] On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Andy Wang <aw...@ptc.com> wrote: The issue is currently reproduced using Apache httpd 2.4.16, mod_jk 1.2.41 and tomcat 8.0.28. I've created a very very simple JSP page that does nothing but

Re: [users@httpd] Chunked transfer delay with httpd 2.4 on Windows.

On 10/19/2015 07:44 PM, Eric Covener wrote: On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: This is the deferred write triggering *after* the keepalive timeout, whereas no subsequent request was pipelined. I wonder if we shouldn't issue a flush at the end of each

Re: PR 54626 - ldaps not working with microsoft ldapsdk

On 09/08/2015 09:38 PM, Eric Covener wrote: I always build with an alternate SDK on Windows Do you mind if I ask which sdk (mozilla?) and why? Thanks, Andy

Re: PR 54626 - ldaps not working with microsoft ldapsdk

The patch in trunk is broken. It looks like it was applied with the 2.2.25 generated diff and patch heuristically applied On 09/08/2015 09:38 PM, Eric Covener wrote: No reason at all as far as I can tell, just overlooked. I always build with an alternate SDK on Windows -- a confirmation

Re: PR 54626 - ldaps not working with microsoft ldapsdk

On 09/10/2015 01:50 PM, Andy Wang wrote: I'm going to try 2.2.31 now to see if I see different behavior. But other than to correct the incorrect message about SSL being unavailable, in 2.4.x the fixed version of the patch doesn't appear to functionally change anything. yup, 2.2.31 works

Re: PR 54626 - ldaps not working with microsoft ldapsdk

On 09/10/2015 02:51 PM, Eric Covener wrote: On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Andy Wang <aw...@ptc.com> wrote: yup, 2.2.31 works perfectly fine for me as well without any additional patches. I posted a comment on the bugzilla report as well as an updated patch against 2.4.16. I don'

PR 54626 - ldaps not working with microsoft ldapsdk

https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54626 It looks like this was fixed in trunk a couple of years ago. Is there a reason why it wasn't proposed for a backport to 2.4 or to 2.2? I don't mind managing the patch myself - I'm trying to get someone to stage a system for me to test it,

Re: Build error w/ 2.2.31 and Fbsd10

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/ssl/ssl_engine_dh.c?revision=1680916view=markup Line 80 static const unsigned char dh1024_p[] = { is in an #if 0 Line 113 is not static const unsigned char dh1024_p[] = { ssl_engine_dh.c:123:28: error: redefinition of 'dh1024_p'

Re: The show goes on - 2.4.16

http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1661848 https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53882 Looks like it was explicitly changed to track mpms like any other shared module, and as Bill noted, --enable-load-all-modules simply loaded them all mpms included. Andy On

Re: building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

Yup, 2.2.31 built fine, and surprisingly it had the ssl deps change too. I put the nmake into a retry loop :) And now it's all automated. Yay. Thanks for the help, Andy On 07/15/2015 10:22 AM, Andy Wang wrote: On 07/14/2015 09:37 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: On 7/14/2015 12:09 PM, Andy Wang

Re: building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

On 07/14/2015 09:37 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: On 7/14/2015 12:09 PM, Andy Wang wrote: link.exe -lib @C:\Users\runtime\AppData\Local\Temp\nm9E02.tmp c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\VC\BIN\nmake.exe - nologo -f libaprutil.mak CFG=libaprutil - Win32 Release

building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

I wanted to just send a quick email out to see if anyone is familiar enough with the windows compile process to see if there are any thoughts on how to improve what I'm doing. So a few quick points 1) i'm using the unix source to prep the source tree 2) i'm not using any external

Re: building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

On 07/14/2015 10:36 AM, Mario Brandt wrote: Hi Andy, at least for the 2.4 there is a script on github [1] Maybe you can adopt that for 2.2. I wonder why you still want 2.2. Unless you use some exotic modules that do no build with 2.4, 2.4 is the better option. [1]

Re: building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

On 07/14/2015 10:53 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote: cmake support for 2.2 should be a straightforward adjustment to 2.4 cmake ;) (not anywhere visible on my priority list) Nor should it be :) Not for 2.2 at least. Honestly, I'd like to get all our customers on 2.2 to 2.4 asap. It would save

Re: building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

asking on here hoping maybe someone had a bright idea that worked :) Thanks, Andy On 07/14/2015 10:22 AM, Andy Wang wrote: I wanted to just send a quick email out to see if anyone is familiar enough with the windows compile process to see if there are any thoughts on how to improve what I'm

Re: building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

Well,i just figured out #2 and #3 devenv /upgrade Apache.sln devenv /build Release /project InstallBin So just the dsw to sln conversion/save is manual now. Andy On 07/14/2015 10:36 AM, Andy Wang wrote: I should add that I've done a little big of digging into MS documentation and googling

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.2.30 as GA?

On 07/14/2015 08:06 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: The PROXY_DECLARE bug doesn't seem to be a showstopper, the announce can make note of that fix. With that issue addressed, this is my +1 for release. I think that makes sense. If you've already gone through the contortions of build from

Re: building httpd 2.2 on windows automation question.

On 07/14/2015 01:47 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: You know 2.2 has .mak files in the source. They've been given no love in a long time but nothing major has changed for them to need it AFAIK. Those should make your automating life simple. nmake /f makefile.win [options] installr I was never able

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.2.30 as GA?

On 07/11/2015 09:29 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: The pre-release candidate tarballs of Apache httpd 2.2.30, can be found in; http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/ +/-1 [ ] Release 2.2.30 GA (apr 1.5.2, apr-util 1.5.4) Win32 src to follow shortly, vote to run through 14:30 GMT Tuesday.

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.2.30 as GA?

On 07/13/2015 05:27 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Andy Wang aw...@ptc.com wrote: I'm running into a problem with mod_proxy_balancer unable to find ap_proxy_set_scoreboard_lb on Windows. There is possibly a missing PROXY_DECLARE for ap_proxy_set_scoreboard_lb

Re: httpd 2.4 and windows hangs and AcceptFilter solution

On 06/11/2015 09:02 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: Sounds telling. Can you get your installer to stall without invoking httpd.exe - and then attempt to start httpd outside of the installer on the same machine? Something going on within the installer may be interacting with the winsock stack.

Re: httpd 2.4 and windows hangs and AcceptFilter solution

On 06/11/2015 12:54 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Andy Wang aw...@ptc.com mailto:aw...@ptc.com wrote: On 06/11/2015 09:02 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: Sounds telling. Can you get your installer to stall without invoking

Re: httpd 2.4 and windows hangs and AcceptFilter solution

On 06/10/2015 09:46 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Andy Wang aw...@ptc.com mailto:aw...@ptc.com wrote: I can reproduce the first case with the installer, pretty much ondemand using our installer stuff. I've tried reproducing it by ripping out

httpd 2.4 and windows hangs and AcceptFilter solution

I originally asked this on user@httpd and didn't get a response, so thought I'd redirect to dev and see if anyone can explain why this would occur if you have time. I have to admit, it's a curiosity to me, that I just don't want to let go until I understand it and what research I've done into

Re: httpd 2.4 and windows hangs and AcceptFilter solution

-traffic cases. On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Andy Wang aw...@ptc.com mailto:aw...@ptc.com wrote: I originally asked this on user@httpd and didn't get a response, so thought I'd redirect to dev and see if anyone can explain why this would occur if you have time. I have to admit

Re: httpd 2.4 and windows hangs and AcceptFilter solution

tests, and these are mostly remote clients running IE11. Andy On 06/10/2015 03:52 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: Can you reproduce using the real network driver? The loopback/localhost interface is famously junk. On Jun 10, 2015 11:22 AM, Andy Wang aw...@ptc.com mailto:aw...@ptc.com wrote

Re: httpd and OpenSSL 1.0.2

On 05/29/2015 09:20 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: Here you can see the SONAME is libssl.so.1.0.0. This name is added as a dependency into the linked binary. At runtime the runtime linker will look for this file, not for libssl.so. During installation of lobssl.so (resp. libcrypto.so) typically the

Re: httpd and OpenSSL 1.0.2

On 05/27/2015 11:33 AM, Mario Brandt wrote: Hi Tom, I tried on Debian 7 and 8 both x64 To see your configure options would help a lot. The missing symbol is in the lib. mario@sasuke:~$ whereis libssl.so libssl: /usr/lib/libssl.a /usr/lib/libssl.so mario@sasuke:~$ readelf -s

Re: SSL/TLS best current practice

Here's my proposed comment to inject in trunk/2.4/2.2 default httpd-ssl.conf - any adjustments here? # httpd 2.2.30, 2.4.13 and later force-disable aNULL, eNULL and EXP ciphers, # while OpenSSL disabled these by default in 0.9.8zf/1.0.0r/1.0.1m/1.0.2a. +1 Agreed +1. That's nice and

Re: SSL/TLS best current practice

--- # SSL Cipher Suite: # List the ciphers that the client is permitted to negotiate. # See the mod_ssl documentation for a complete list. SSLCipherSuite HIGH:MEDIUM:!MD5:!RC4 SSLProxyCipherSuite HIGH:MEDIUM:!MD5:!RC4 !aNULL isn't needed?

Re: SSL/TLS best current practice

On 05/26/2015 11:25 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com mailto:ylavic@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Andy Wang aw...@ptc.com mailto:aw...@ptc.com wrote: # SSL Cipher Suite: # List

Win32 src bundles for Apache

This was brought up a while ago that the Apache 2.4.x and 2.2.23 builds were lacking the win32 source bundle. There was some discussion about how to build these bundles: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/201209.mbox/%3C506243E0.3050108%40apache.org%3E Is there anyway to make

Re: Win32 src bundles for Apache

On 12/18/2012 02:45 PM, Gregg Smith wrote: On 12/18/2012 9:00 AM, Yehuda Katz wrote: On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Andy Wang aw...@ptc.com mailto:aw...@ptc.com wrote: This was brought up a while ago that the Apache 2.4.x and 2.2.23 builds were lacking the win32 source bundle

Re: Broken Link

Is there any chance the details of how to build the windows src packages can be made available? I'd love to learn what exactly needs to be done here. Thanks, Andy On 09/25/2012 06:53 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote: Am 25.09.2012 17:28, schrieb Jim Jagielski: This *really* seems like some tribal

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache HTTP Server 2.4.3 Released

On 08/21/2012 06:55 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: NOTE to Windows users: The issues with AcceptFilter None replacing Win32DisableAcceptEx appears to have resolved starting with version 2.4.3 make Apache httpd 2.4.x suitable for Windows servers. I noticed the following blurb from

Multi-byte DN with MS LDAPSDK and Apache

Quite some time ago, one of my colleagues started the following thread: http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-devm=121623942300453w=2 http://marc.info/?l=apache-httpd-devm=121623942300453w=2 There was some discussion around the Windows utf-8 codepage and it's relationship to the local codepage.

SSLCipherSuite and SSL BrowserMatch configuration changes

A while ago, Lars Eilebrecht proposed a change to the default SSL CipherSuite and BrowserMatch directives and was planning on submitting the changes to trunk barring any -1s. I haven't seen any action on this, and I've been really interested in the proposed BrowserMatch changes. We've run into

Re: Speeding up mod_proxy_balancer on Windows

Ruediger Pluem wrote: According to the Microsoft (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/314053) TcpMaxConnectRetransmissions Key: Tcpip\Parameters Value Type: REG_DWORD - Number Valid Range: 0 - 0x Default: 2 Description: This parameter determines the number of times that

Re: Speeding up mod_proxy_balancer on Windows

. Any thoughts? -- Jess Holle Andy Wang wrote: Ruediger Pluem wrote: According to the Microsoft (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/314053) TcpMaxConnectRetransmissions Key: Tcpip\Parameters Value Type: REG_DWORD - Number Valid Range: 0 - 0x Default: 2 Description

Re: Speeding up mod_proxy_balancer on Windows

Ruediger Pluem wrote: Correct and my statement didn't imply to set this registry value to 0. I think this is a dangerous road and could lead to other network problems. While your statement didn't imply that, the microsoft knowledge base article seems to imply that this registry setting

Re: Apache - MS LDAPSDK with multi-byte DN

mangled with the ? character: entry = ldap_first_entry(ldc-ldap, res); dn = ldap_get_dn(ldc-ldap, entry); Thanks, Andy Eric Covener wrote: On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Andy Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the case where we're seeing this none of the arguments contain anything other

Re: Apache - MS LDAPSDK with multi-byte DN

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: That's correct. Windows utf-8 code page 65001 or so is only a psuedo page in all older and (afaik) newer flavors of windows). So it's returning this character in the local code page, can't represent it, and falls back on '?'. Yup, and that's what our assumption

Re: Apache - MS LDAPSDK with multi-byte DN

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: For what it's worth I also did try using the ldap_search_ext_sW call directy inside the uldap_cache_checkuserid function but that resulted in a filter error. Yup :) So if you were to tweak things to decode utf-8 into unicode and then invoke the W flavor, it

Re: Apache 2.2.9 default bindist/apr library problem

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: In a case where it is relocated, envvar just needs to be updated right? As a workaround, yes. In the long term, we have to fix apr-util, really not httpd's problem, to teach apr-util's apu_dso to hunt in each shlibpath dir and its apr-1-config subdir. As for

Re: Apache 2.2.9 default bindist/apr library problem

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Eric Covener wrote: One case to keep on the radar: There can be configuration mechanisms for the loader outside of the SHLIB_PATH envvar. If this is apr-util in /usr/lib, so no shlib-path-var is in use, would we be able to find /usr/lib/apr-util-1/apr_foo-1.so?

Re: Apache 2.2.9 default bindist/apr library problem

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: In the long term, we have to fix apr-util, really not httpd's problem, to teach apr-util's apu_dso to hunt in each shlibpath dir and its apr-1-config subdir. Ahh I see. So your thoughts are to fix the bindist relocation problem, having apr-util look in all the

Apache 2.2.9 default bindist/apr library problem

Hi all, We noticed that with Apache 2.2.9 when the bundled APR is used, the bindist installation ends up having the following structure in bindist/lib: ./pkgconfig ./pkgconfig/apr-1.pc ./pkgconfig/apr-util-1.pc ./libapr-1.so.0.3.0 ./libapr-1.so.0 ./libapr-1.so ./libapr-1.la ./libapr-1.a

Apache bug #37814 sizelimit issue with Microsoft SDK

Any chance I can convince a developer to look at Apache Bug #37814: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37814 I've gotten about half a dozen pings offline about people asking if the patch I posted fixes the problem (it does indeed), and it'd be nice if we can get this workaround

client timeout behavior.

We noticed that with mod_proxy_ajp, it's not possible to set an indefinite timeout like was possible with mod_jk. So a long running JSP page, for example: % Thread.sleep(96); % With mod_proxy_ajp timeout set to 300 will cause a 503 to be thrown back to the client since mod_proxy_ajp's

Re: bug #42120: Apache improperly handling Path Component parameters?

Nick Kew wrote: On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:30:06 -0500 Andy Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are a number of potential workarounds (LocationMatch, or Multiple Location blocks to deal with the ;* pattern) but it does seem like this is a bug unless someone can clarify RFC 2396 section 3.3

bug #42120: Apache improperly handling Path Component parameters?

I just submitted bug 42120. It appears that Apache is improperly (at least I think it's improper) matching Location blocks when doing authentication if a path component parameter is passed on. Specifically, something like this Location /webapp/servlet/SomeServlet {Auth stuff} /Location In

Re: util_ldap.c use of hardcoded sizelimit on ldap_search_ext_s causing error

Brad Nicholes wrote: Maybe I missed this before, but what platform or LDAP SDK does this fail on? The Novell LDAP SDK obviously supports LDAP_DEFAULT_SIZELIMIT (-1) and according to the OpenLDAP source code, it also supports the same functionality if the value of sizelimit is -1 even though

mod_proxy issues and patch

Hi all, I'm trying to work on getting some sane AJP proxy configurations using Apache 2.2.4. The problem I'm running into is that we use RewriteRules to use regular expression matching for proxying. In a previous thread on this dev list there was a discussion around ProxyPass being

Re: Apache 2.2.2 + CGI - Child Exit?!?

Bug filed: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40051

Re: Win32 Apache and ldap size limit problem.

. Ideally sizelimit could be configureable via a module directive, but since we'll be maintaining our own build with this patch I didn't want to do anything too heavyweight. Andy Andy Wang wrote: I noticed that with OpenLDAP 2.2.x, auth_ldap from apache on windows fails. The actual error ends up

Re: Win32 Apache and ldap size limit problem.

is even using any of the extended features of ldap_search_ext_s so why bother using it. I'd be more than willing to create the patch if someone wants to comment on which solution they like more. Andy Andy Wang wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Please clarify, this is the win32 WLDAP32

Re: Win32 Apache and ldap size limit problem.

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Andy Wang wrote: I noticed that with OpenLDAP 2.2.x, auth_ldap from apache on windows fails. The actual error ends up being a invalid size limit on the openldap end of things. Please clarify, this is the win32 WLDAP32.dll client to OpenLDAP 2.2 backend ldap