Hi list,
I'm working on PR 62220 and I don't understand what could cause the
reported regression.
Apparently the behavior of RemoteIPInternalProxyList has changed in
2.4.33. But RemoteIPInternalProxy (without List) still works as expected.
Looking at the implementation of the 2 directives,
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Christophe Jaillet
wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I'm working on PR 62220 and I don't understand what could cause the reported
> regression.
>
> Apparently the behavior of RemoteIPInternalProxyList has changed in 2.4.33.
> But RemoteIPInternalProxy (without List) still works
Le 06/04/2018 à 20:23, Eric Covener a écrit :
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Christophe Jaillet
wrote:
Hi list,
I'm working on PR 62220 and I don't understand what could cause the reported
regression.
Apparently the behavior of RemoteIPInternalProxyList has changed in 2.4.33.
But RemoteIPI
Asking me to ask myself why I did what I did 10 years ago :)
Best explanation I have is that I'd envisioned that the internal and
external trust lists would be universally accepted lists, and they are
*very* slow to parse with DNS lookups. E.g. the wikipedia X-F-F
whitelist. And a corporate firewa