[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings all,
snip
From what I've read about the 2.0 API, this application (rate limiting of
server output) seems perfect for an output filter. However, one of my first
questions centers around where in the filter chain behavior such as this should
go.
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 08:06:45AM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
your trying to limit traffic based on what kind of request/request path
it has ?
Yes, actually based on vhost, URI, directory, file type, size, user, time of
day, etc, etc.. pretty much anything you can think of. It also supports
Hello Alex,
tell me more about your module.
Is it already available for testing
and apache2?
Bye and thanks,
Werner.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 1:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Questions about filter
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 01:31:04AM +0200, Werner Schalk wrote:
tell me more about your module.
Is it already available for testing
and apache2?
Nope, as I mentioned, I've got the core decision-making code (and the
rate-limiting theory) written, but I'm just starting to put together an apache
On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 09:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll let people know when I have something people might actually want to use :)
I don't know if you're planning to make this module free software, but
if you do - treat your users as developers and they will be the
developers :-)
Bojan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 08:06:45AM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
your trying to limit traffic based on what kind of request/request path
it has ?
Yes, actually based on vhost, URI, directory, file type, size, user, time of
day, etc, etc.. pretty much anything you
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 09:58:01AM +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote:
On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 09:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll let people know when I have something people might actually want to use :)
I don't know if you're planning to make this module free software, but
if you do - treat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, my main concern is if there are things down the line which buffer large
portions of data before sending them out, it would generate bursty network
traffic, which I want to avoid. Part of the reason I'm doing this is because I
want to have more smooth control of
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 04:55:57PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
hmm
you might run into trouble on filetype/size (anything which you need the
response for) as there is no hook after the handler.
Hmm, that's a little annoying.. I'm actually realizing that I probably can't
do it cleanly based on
On Fri, 2002-08-30 at 10:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most of this code isn't even out of my head yet, give me a chance to scribble
some of it down before you all try to test it! :)
Having that thingy from Johnny Mnemonic, would help during that phase, I
reckon ;-) Happy hacking!
Bojan
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 05:10:00PM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
Another possibility would be to create a new metadata bucket type.
In a request-level hook or filter, insert a metadata bucket that
describes the appropriate bandwidth-throttling rules for the buckets
that follow. Then you can use a
11 matches
Mail list logo
