Hi list,
thanks for the replies. Looks like squid in case Content-Length
response header is missing, does it's limitation in a hard way (snip
from src/client_side.c):
} else if (clientReplyBodyTooLarge(http, http-out.offset - 4096)) {
/* 4096 is a margin for the HTTP headers included
On 2/13/07, Dziugas Baltrunas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi list,
thanks for the replies. Looks like squid in case Content-Length
response header is missing, does it's limitation in a hard way (snip
from src/client_side.c):
} else if (clientReplyBodyTooLarge(http, http-out.offset - 4096)) {
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:30:32 +
Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. If there's no C-L ModSecurity will count the bytes as they arrive.
If there are too many the entire response will be blocked with 500
(and the error page sent to the client).
That's a tradeoff you make against
On 2/13/07, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:30:32 +
Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. If there's no C-L ModSecurity will count the bytes as they arrive.
If there are too many the entire response will be blocked with 500
(and the error page sent to the
Hi list,
I'm wondering if there any plans to implement implement a response
body length limitation inside mod_proxy?
For now we have only a global LimitRequestBody and what I'm looking is
an analog LimitResponseBody. In case Apache HTTP works as a
reverse/forward proxy, it's usual case for a
mån 2007-02-12 klockan 12:41 +0200 skrev Dziugas Baltrunas:
To illustrate, squid for this purpose has reply_body_max_size [1]
parameter. Looks like it is only Content-Length response header (if
any) dependent,
It also terminates requests when the amount of data transferred hits the
specified
Dziugas Baltrunas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi list,
I'm wondering if there any plans to implement implement a response
body length limitation inside mod_proxy?
For now we have only a global LimitRequestBody and what I'm looking is
an analog LimitResponseBody. In case Apache HTTP works as
On 2/12/07, Ding Deng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dziugas Baltrunas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi list,
I'm wondering if there any plans to implement implement a response
body length limitation inside mod_proxy?
For now we have only a global LimitRequestBody and what I'm looking is
an analog
Dziugas Baltrunas schreef:
Hi list,
I'm wondering if there any plans to implement implement a response
body length limitation inside mod_proxy?
Output filter which checks the size and returns an error when it's
larger than a predefined size?
Joost
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:26:54 +0100
Joost de Heer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dziugas Baltrunas schreef:
Hi list,
I'm wondering if there any plans to implement implement a response
body length limitation inside mod_proxy?
Output filter which checks the size and returns an error when it's
mån 2007-02-12 klockan 17:51 + skrev Nick Kew:
2. Where there's chunked encoding, the check would best be
implemented in the chunking filter.
3. A simple count/abort filter is then a last resort.
And it won't be able to tell the client what's happened,
because the header has already
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:09:57 +0100
Henrik Nordstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mån 2007-02-12 klockan 17:51 + skrev Nick Kew:
2. Where there's chunked encoding, the check would best be
implemented in the chunking filter.
3. A simple count/abort filter is then a last resort.
And it
mån 2007-02-12 klockan 21:55 + skrev Nick Kew:
Because the chunking filter is equipped to discard the chunk that
takes it over the limit, and substitute end-of-chunking.
If we do that in a new filter, we have to reinvent that wheel.
Not sure substitue end-of-chunking is a reasonable thing
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:35:24 +0100
Henrik Nordstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mån 2007-02-12 klockan 21:55 + skrev Nick Kew:
Because the chunking filter is equipped to discard the chunk that
takes it over the limit, and substitute end-of-chunking.
If we do that in a new filter, we
14 matches
Mail list logo
