Re: Scope of RemoteIPProxyProtocol* (was: svn commit: r1824211 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

Not at all. This is physical host vs named based vhost. We got clever and eliminated the distinction after 2.0... which is catching up with us. Should we reintroduce a physical vhost? I don't have a simple answer, but we can at least keep repeating that the first vhost is the physical vhost and

Re: Scope of RemoteIPProxyProtocol* (was: svn commit: r1824211 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

That explanation is noxious. If enabled in the *default* initial matching physical ip:port host it applies to all related hosts If enabled in any secondary-non-default named vhost it is ignored. On Feb 14, 2018 06:28, "Graham Leggett" wrote: > On 14 Feb 2018, at 1:03 PM,

Re: Scope of RemoteIPProxyProtocol* (was: svn commit: r1824211 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

I had a patch posted here on Monday that introduces ... with a server_rec and configs between base server and a a set of vhosts. Would that satisfy your needs for this? -Stefan > Am 14.02.2018 um 14:39 schrieb Graham Leggett : > > On 14 Feb 2018, at 3:05 PM,

Re: Scope of RemoteIPProxyProtocol* (was: svn commit: r1824211 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

On 14 Feb 2018, at 3:05 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > It makes sense, and actually I missed some logic w.r.t. > enabled/disabled being a list of sockaddrs (based on servers' > server_addr_rec, and not a global boolean as I first thought...). This > is later compared to incoming

Re: Scope of RemoteIPProxyProtocol* (was: svn commit: r1824211 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 1:28 PM, Graham Leggett wrote: > On 14 Feb 2018, at 1:03 PM, Yann Ylavic 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

Re: Scope of RemoteIPProxyProtocol* (was: svn commit: r1824211 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

On 14 Feb 2018, at 1:03 PM, Yann Ylavic 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

Scope of RemoteIPProxyProtocol* (was: svn commit: r1824211 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS)

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:21 AM, wrote: > >*) mod_remoteip: Add PROXY protocol support [] > ylavic: RemoteIPProxyProtocol* are documented as scoped to server config > and virtual host, though using ap_server_conf makes them global > only