On 01.05.2015 16:29, s...@apache.org wrote:
Author: stsp
Date: Fri May 1 14:28:59 2015
New Revision: 1677149
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1677149
Log:
mod_ssl namespacing: Make SSL_ASN1_STRING_to_utf8 a static function inside
ssl_util_ssl.c (no callers outside this file). The new static
On 01.05.2015 17:11, Stefan Sperling wrote:
I believe SSL_X509_INFO_load_path() should be inlined into
its only caller.
I'm +1 for this. The Low-Level CA Certificate Loading part in
ssl_util_ssl.c is / was only used by ssl_init_proxy_certs, so I would be
in favor of also moving
On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Kaspar Brand wrote:
On 01.05.2015 16:29, s...@apache.org wrote:
Author: stsp
Date: Fri May 1 14:28:59 2015
New Revision: 1677149
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1677149
Log:
mod_ssl namespacing: Make SSL_ASN1_STRING_to_utf8 a static function
On 1 May 2015, at 01:30, Daniel Ruggeri drugg...@primary.net wrote:
4. The backend MUST add the X-Backend-Info token to the Connection
response header, making it a hop-by-hop field that is removed by the
frontend from the downstream response (RFC2616 14.10 and RFC7230 6.1). [Note
there
On 1 May 2015, at 01:30, Daniel Ruggeri drugg...@primary.net wrote:
On 4/29/2015 11:54 PM, Jim Riggs wrote:
So, this has come up in the past several times, and we discussed it again
this year at ApacheCon: How do we get the load balancer to make smarter,
more informed decisions about
On 4/30/15 2:52 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
It seems that we have 2 groups of good things to come out of ApacheCon,
some immediate fixes for things like BSD project efforts, some pretty
straightforward defects that have been resolved... and then there's a bunch
of energy about enhancements
I’m Cc: this to d...@trafficserver.apache.org, since I think this is something
some of our dev would be interested in. There are a few other replies to this
thread already, which can be seen on the archives.
As has been mentioned in another reply, I think the header name ought to be
something
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Stefan Sperling s...@apache.org wrote:
...
So modssl_ has been agreed on? :)
It hasn't been agreed. Just not denied. Yet.
:-P
On 1 May 2015, at 10:52, André Malo n...@perlig.de wrote:
* Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Jim Riggs apache-li...@riggs.me
wrote:
Thanks, Yann. I remember looking at this code before. The question
remains, though: Is it
