[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think that while ProxyPreserveHost is set that if you don't get a Host > header then it's fine to create one and set it to server_name. But this can > happen in http 1.0 just as well as 0.9 can't it? > > For 1.3, do we _need_ to create Host header when we didn't get one? The > proxy outgoing requests are currently http 1.0 which doesn't mandate a Host > header.
Proxy is now HTTP/1.1 in both 1.3 and 2.0, which forces a Host header.
> > I've got the 2.0 version working now.
>
> > The only question I've got (which will affect the 1.3 patch)
> > is what do you do when you get a 0.9 request.
>
> > I've set it up so that IF the hostname is blank on the incoming request
> > it will use r->server->server_name. as a default.
In the case of 0.9 you can only do what is practical. AFAIK there is no
indication of host name anywhere in a normal 0.9 request, except maybe
in the URI itself if a proxy is used explicitely (ie not
reverse-proxy+preserve-host and not transparent proxy). If it's there,
we should use that, otherwise I think we should return either a 501 not
implemented or a 505 version not supported.
Regards,
Graham
--
-----------------------------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "There's a moon
over Bourbon Street
tonight..."
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
