https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #11 from Yann Ylavic <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Tabby from comment #10) > > At the moment, is there a valid alternative to this? > --- > RewriteRule ^/ws/live/(.*) %{ENV:proto}://vip-be/wwgw/var/$1 [P,QSA,L] > <Proxy http://vip-be/wwgw/var> > ProxySet smax=0 ttl=15 > </Proxy> > --- No currently there isn't an alternative, mod_proxy can't work either ws: or http: on the same path. The patch I proposed above may help though (not tested), maybe you could try it (instead of the RewriteRules, it should work without). > > Furthermore: is it necessary, in your opinion, to add a <Proxy> block also > for ws, in order to keep its connection alive or is it worthless because of > its long-living nature? Once the connection is upgraded to websocket, it can't (and must not) be reused/kept-alive. mod_proxy_wstunnel takes care of that already, whatever is set for disablereuse (if the proxy worker is declared). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
