On 2/11/2011 8:26 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
>
> Thanks, went ahead and pushed them down since it's easy enough to put
> any of them back.
>
Which reminds me... anyone care to add a +1 or begin a discussion about
the mod_proxy change I had submitted? rpluem and covener have given the
+1... but I see a link to the patch in its current incarnation has gone
missing from STATUS. Just wanted to bring it up so it doesn't get
relegated to the 'forgotten' list :)
The notes about its past are here:
Merge r1039304, r1053584 from trunk:
* Put a note in the connection notes that the SSL handshake to the backend
failed such that mod_proxy can put the worker in error state.
PR: 50332
Submitted by: Daniel Ruggeri <DRuggeri primary.net>
Reviewed by: rpluem
* Fix r1039304 and make the patch similar to the one proposed for
2.2.x: If the SSL handshake to the backend fails we cannot even
sent an HTTP request. So the check needs to happen already when
we sent data not when we receive data.
I'd like to have this patch committed for the next stable 2.2 release if
no one has objections (and attribution for rpluem and myself if
appropriate in CHANGELOG). Just thought I would raise awareness in case
anyone could spare a moment to discuss.
P.S.
I eventually plan to submit a similar change made in mod_ssl to the
mod_nss so that same functionality can be retained. Does anyone know of
others out there?
--
Daniel Ruggeri
