On 14 Feb 2018, at 1:03 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote:

> The docs talk about connection based config, while ap_server_conf is
> really the main server config.
> The code should be improved to be based on c->baser_server config
> (with merging of RemoteIPProxyProtocol*), unless I'm missing something
> it seems (as of now) that the directives overwrite each other when
> used in vhost context (not only for name-based vhosts).
> So now (or post-backport) I think we should at least document the
> scope as being "server config" only, and follow up with
> "c->baser_server config" when possible (not a blocker for the first
> version).

The docs explain the above here, which makes sense to me:

    <p>While this directive may be specified in any virtual host, it is
    important to understand that because the proxy protocol is connection
    based and protocol agnostic, the enabling and disabling is actually based
    on ip-address and port. This means that if you have multiple name-based
    virtual hosts for the same host and port, and you enable it any one of
    them, then it is enabled for all them (with that host and port). It also
    means that if you attempt to enable the proxy protocol in one and disable
    in the other, that won't work; in such a case the last one wins and a
    notice will be logged indicating which setting was being overridden.</p>


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to