Just wondering if there is any plans on addressing Bug #39727, incorrect
ETag on gzip:ed content (mod_deflate).
Been pretty silent for a long while now, and the current implementation
is a clear violation of RFC2616 and makes a mess of any shared cache
trying to cache responses from mod_deflate
I'm not proposing a solution but just pointing out that if this discussion
is going to come up once again that even the latest, greatest versions
of one of the most popular browsers in the world, Microsoft Internet
Explorer, will still REFUSE TO CACHE any response that shows up
with a Vary: on
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 14:29:36 +0200
Henrik Nordstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just wondering if there is any plans on addressing Bug #39727,
incorrect ETag on gzip:ed content (mod_deflate).
In the absence of a better suggestion, I'd be +1 for the little
hack you suggest in Comment #10. Bug me
You are the CNN guy, right?
Of your 30 percent... is there an identifiable User-Agent
that comprises a visible chunk of the requests?
If so... what is it?
Yours...
Kevin Kiley
In a message dated 8/27/2007 10:09:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 8/27/07 12:34 PM,
On 8/27/07 1:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are the CNN guy, right?
Sure, why not...
Of your 30 percent... is there an identifiable User-Agent
that comprises a visible chunk of the requests?
If so... what is it?
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1;
On 08/27/2007 06:45 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 14:29:36 +0200
Henrik Nordstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just wondering if there is any plans on addressing Bug #39727,
incorrect ETag on gzip:ed content (mod_deflate).
In the absence of a better suggestion, I'd be +1 for the
On mån, 2007-08-27 at 13:09 -0400, Akins, Brian wrote:
On 8/27/07 12:34 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hasn't the non-compressed variant become an extreme edge-case
by now? I would certainly hope so.
Unfortunately not. About 30% of our requests do not advertise gzip
On mån, 2007-08-27 at 22:00 +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
But without an adjusted conditional checking this leads to a failure
of conditional requests. And I currently do not see how we can adjust
ap_meets_conditions. As I understand 13.3.3 of RFC2616 the DEFLATE_OUT
filter transforms a
