On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 07:45:40AM -0000, Jean-Frederic Clere wrote:
> --- httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy_ajp.c (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy_ajp.c Thu Sep 8 07:45:40 2011
> @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ static int ap_proxy_ajp_request(apr_pool
> "proxy: AJP: request failed to %pI (%s)",
> conn->worker->cp->addr,
> conn->worker->s->hostname);
> - if (status == AJP_EOVERFLOW)
> + if (status == AJP_EOVERFLOW || status == AJP_EBAD_METHOD)
> return HTTP_BAD_REQUEST;
> else {
> /*
An unrecognized method from the client does not imply a syntactically
invalid request, so it does not look like 400 is an appropriate
response.
501 would be normal here - if I'm reading the proxy logic correctly,
only 500 and 503 have special semantics, so it should be fine to do
this?
Index: modules/proxy/mod_proxy_ajp.c
===================================================================
--- modules/proxy/mod_proxy_ajp.c (revision 1166642)
+++ modules/proxy/mod_proxy_ajp.c (working copy)
@@ -214,8 +214,10 @@
"proxy: AJP: request failed to %pI (%s)",
conn->worker->cp->addr,
conn->worker->s->hostname);
- if (status == AJP_EOVERFLOW || status == AJP_EBAD_METHOD)
+ if (status == AJP_EOVERFLOW)
return HTTP_BAD_REQUEST;
+ else if (status == AJP_EBAD_METHOD)
+ return HTTP_NOT_IMPLEMENTED;
else {
/*
* This is only non fatal when the method is idempotent. In this
