Alex Rousskov wrote:
On 03/01/2010 04:06 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote:
mån 2010-03-01 klockan 14:46 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
in hope that it would be useful for Squids that default to HTTP/1.0 and
those that default to HTTP/1.1. I am not sure we will ever need to
downgrade to HTTP/1.0 but it i
> Aim for committing to trunk in about a week. Seeing how much we can get
> tested and into 3.1 as well. Final RC for 3.1 is expected in 2 weeks.
Sorry to crash the party, but we're still leaking FD somewhere.
I checked with 3.1-current, bug in 'zilla and marked it as blocking, target 3.1
K
--
On 03/01/2010 04:06 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote:
> mån 2010-03-01 klockan 14:46 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
>
>> in hope that it would be useful for Squids that default to HTTP/1.0 and
>> those that default to HTTP/1.1. I am not sure we will ever need to
>> downgrade to HTTP/1.0 but it is certainly
On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:07:16 +0100, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> tis 2010-03-02 klockan 12:34 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries:
>
>> The only risk I can really see is with compliant servers. If they see
us
>> as 1.1 relaying an Expect: there is a reasonably high risk they might
>> actually try to use it.
tis 2010-03-02 klockan 01:14 +0100 skrev Henrik Nordström:
> > Which won't hurt compared to today assuming we are swallowing the 100
> > responses, which we already do due to broken servers sending them to us
> > even in HTTP/1.0..
>
> Or.. are we.. can'ẗ find the code for that in Squid-3. Have a
tis 2010-03-02 klockan 01:07 +0100 skrev Henrik Nordström:
> tis 2010-03-02 klockan 12:34 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries:
>
> > The only risk I can really see is with compliant servers. If they see us
> > as 1.1 relaying an Expect: there is a reasonably high risk they might
> > actually try to use it
tis 2010-03-02 klockan 12:34 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries:
> The only risk I can really see is with compliant servers. If they see us
> as 1.1 relaying an Expect: there is a reasonably high risk they might
> actually try to use it. As they should.
Which won't hurt compared to today assuming we are
On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 00:06:02 +0100, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> mån 2010-03-01 klockan 14:46 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
>
>> in hope that it would be useful for Squids that default to HTTP/1.0 and
>> those that default to HTTP/1.1. I am not sure we will ever need to
>> downgrade to HTTP/1.0 but it
tis 2010-03-02 klockan 00:06 +0100 skrev Henrik Nordström:
> mån 2010-03-01 klockan 14:46 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
>
> > in hope that it would be useful for Squids that default to HTTP/1.0 and
> > those that default to HTTP/1.1. I am not sure we will ever need to
> > downgrade to HTTP/1.0 but it
tis 2010-03-02 klockan 11:17 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries:
> * stripping Expect: headers on requests (by skipping 417 abort plus
> "request_header_access Expect deny all")
Haven't seen any need for skipping/filtering the Expect header. Squid-2
forwards any received Expect headers.
> * ignoring Ex
mån 2010-03-01 klockan 14:46 -0700 skrev Alex Rousskov:
> in hope that it would be useful for Squids that default to HTTP/1.0 and
> those that default to HTTP/1.1. I am not sure we will ever need to
> downgrade to HTTP/1.0 but it is certainly possible, especially if we
> default to HTTP/1.1 (is no
On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:46:44 -0700, Alex Rousskov
wrote:
> On 02/22/2010 01:28 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> Tsantilas Christos wrote:
>>> Henrik Nordström wrote:
To my understanding our HTTP client is fairly complete wrt HTTP/1.1
requirements.
>>>
>>> We are supporting chunked encodings,
On 02/22/2010 01:28 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> Tsantilas Christos wrote:
>> Henrik Nordström wrote:
>>> To my understanding our HTTP client is fairly complete wrt HTTP/1.1
>>> requirements.
>>
>> We are supporting chunked encodings, and HTTP 1.1 persistent connections.
>> Looks that most of the HTT
Tsantilas Christos wrote:
Henrik Nordström wrote:
sön 2010-02-21 klockan 20:37 +0200 skrev Tsantilas Christos:
There are broken servers out there that insist on receiving HTTP/1.1
requests.
Yes..
and even more which are broken when receiving HTTP/1.0 requests.
This patch adds a new force_ht
Henrik Nordström wrote:
sön 2010-02-21 klockan 20:37 +0200 skrev Tsantilas Christos:
There are broken servers out there that insist on receiving HTTP/1.1
requests.
Yes..
and even more which are broken when receiving HTTP/1.0 requests.
This patch adds a new force_http_1p1_request acl-driven o
mån 2010-02-22 klockan 15:20 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries:
> Just the case you keep kicking me about whenever I propose this:
> That we also have to cater for broken clients when sending 417 back for
> "Expect: 100-continue" requests.
That's towards clients, not towards servers.
Regards
Henrik
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 22:16:10 +0100, Henrik Nordström
wrote:
> sön 2010-02-21 klockan 20:37 +0200 skrev Tsantilas Christos:
>> There are broken servers out there that insist on receiving HTTP/1.1
>> requests.
>
> Yes..
>
> and even more which are broken when receiving HTTP/1.0 requests.
>
>> Th
sön 2010-02-21 klockan 20:37 +0200 skrev Tsantilas Christos:
> There are broken servers out there that insist on receiving HTTP/1.1
> requests.
Yes..
and even more which are broken when receiving HTTP/1.0 requests.
> This patch adds a new force_http_1p1_request acl-driven option to
> squid.con
sön 2010-02-21 klockan 20:37 +0200 skrev Tsantilas Christos:
> Please take care to the "#if WHEN_SQUID_IS_HTTP1_1" block in
> HttpMsg.cc file which was disabled. This block allow squid to consider
> a connection to the HTTP server as persistent in the case the
> "Connection: close" header do
There are broken servers out there that insist on receiving HTTP/1.1
requests.
This patch adds a new force_http_1p1_request acl-driven option to
squid.conf.
When the HTTP request matches the specified ACL, Squid uses "HTTP/1.1"
HTTP-Version string in the request sent to the server. The affe
20 matches
Mail list logo
