On 06/09/2017 03:29 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
>> On 06/08/2017 07:30 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>>> Hi, all;
>>> With the proposal to T&R set for Monday, I wanted to draw attention to
>>> the PROXY protocol proposal in STATUS. Just hopin
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 8:29 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
> To your example, the *global* config line;
>
> RemoteIPProxyProtocol 127.0.0.1 [or 127.0.0.0/24]
>
> would configure all locally routed *client* requests, irrespective of
> which by-IP vhost, to require the PROXY protocol line. Requests
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
> On 06/08/2017 07:30 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
>> Hi, all;
>> With the proposal to T&R set for Monday, I wanted to draw attention to
>> the PROXY protocol proposal in STATUS. Just hoping for a quick review.
>> I know it appears to be a large
On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Perfect... I propose a T&R on Monday... comments?
+1. Many will have noticed already, but apr 1.6.2 and apr-util-1.6.0 vote
threads were just spawned to be tallied 13:00 UTC Monday.
On 06/08/2017 07:30 PM, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
> Hi, all;
> With the proposal to T&R set for Monday, I wanted to draw attention to
> the PROXY protocol proposal in STATUS. Just hoping for a quick review.
> I know it appears to be a large change, but as I worked through the
> feedback, ten of the com