On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:34 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9/3/2011 12:42 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> Author: covener
>> Date: Sat Sep  3 17:42:56 2011
>> New Revision: 1164894
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1164894&view=rev
>> Log:
>> backport revisions 1162584, 1164861, 1162587 from trunk:
>>
>> Add MaxRanges directive and limit # of accepted ranges to 200 by default.
>
> So this doesn't make sense in deploying a patch but seems appropriate to at
> least allow for compiled-in settings...  For purposes of < 2.2.21 patching,
> this would be my interpretation, using the same -Define as in the soon to be
> released versions.  Comments?
>

>> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c
>> URL: 
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c?rev=1164894&r1=1164893&r2=1164894&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c (original)
>> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.2.x/modules/http/byterange_filter.c Sat Sep  3 
>> 17:42:56 2011
>> @@ -55,6 +55,10 @@
>>  #include <unistd.h>
>>  #endif
>>
>> +#ifndef DEFAULT_MAX_RANGES
>> +#define DEFAULT_MAX_RANGES 200
>> +#endif
>> +
>>  static int ap_set_byterange(request_rec *r, apr_off_t clength,
>>                              apr_array_header_t **indexes);
>>
>> @@ -290,7 +294,7 @@ AP_CORE_DECLARE_NONSTD(apr_status_t) ap_
>>      num_ranges = ap_set_byterange(r, clength, &indexes);
>>
>>      /* We have nothing to do, get out of the way. */
>> -    if (num_ranges == 0) {
>> +    if (num_ranges == 0 || (DEFAULT_MAX_RANGES > 0 && num_ranges > 
>> DEFAULT_MAX_RANGES)) {
>>          r->status = original_status;
>>          ap_remove_output_filter(f);
>>          return ap_pass_brigade(f->next, bb);
>>
>
>

I think it's useful, but maybe not baked into the same patch as the fix?

Just noticing -- should the macro be AP_* before it ships in 2.2.21 or
apply_to/?

-- 
Eric Covener
[email protected]

Reply via email to