Stuart Children <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As you've probably guessed, in our module we turn [some] subrequests > into POSTs. (We then set an appropriate CL header and add an input > filter to the subrequest which generates the request body.) I've written > a simple patch which adds a check on the request method again (simply > skipping most of the above lines if it's a POST). However, the comment > "sub-requests ... mustn't pass request bodies" made me think perhaps > some discussion is required before I stick that in bugzilla.
Good question. In apreq I focused on the case where the main request was issued a POST, and the subrequest was a GET. In that case the subrequest doesn't get access to the parsed body via apreq. OTOH, I do think it should be possible to do a POST subrequest in httpd, especially when you're being very careful about the state of the input filter chain. > Is there a reason behind the "musn't"? Ie: are POST subrequests a > problem (assuming there's a valid input_brigade to read and a > corresponding CL)? I'm not sure what the rationale is behind forbidding it within httpd, other than it being a complex situation that wasn't really possible in 1.3. -- Joe Schaefer
