> > but the second has me stumped.  If the user aborts the connection we
> > shouldn't log 200, but I don't know what is correct.  Ryan and I
decided
> > to use 206 for now.  Can I get some opinions on the correct value?
> 
> IMO, the access log should *always* reflect the status code that was
(or
> would have been) sent to the client, regardless of whether the client
> aborted the transaction.  Noting that the client aborted the
transaction
> is the error log's job.

I am more than happy with that argument.  I will change the second
return to APR_SUCCESS, and commit.

Ryan


Reply via email to