On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Eric Covener <[email protected]> wrote:
> I guess we just got unlucky when this overlap was "fixed" before since
> the order is not deterministic. I don't think we'll break anyone by
> making wstunnell try first.
I'm not sure the different schemes ("https" vs "wss") would allow both
handlers to run successively.
r->filename is built once for all (proxy_trans), so mod_proxy_http
would DECLINE "wss://" and same for mod_proxy_wstunnel with
"https://";.
I proposed Upgrade handling in mod_proxy_http (a while ago, see [1]),
which is IMHO a better way to deal with HTTP Upgrading in httpd...
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e441f75818d07112e8122232440752bd8c27d5539b199bcd115e3b4e@%3Cdev.httpd.apache.org%3E
