Re: [users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf

Together watch a movie on  apache with mega wildfly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYMEc7jq5dw=1397s back.but...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Paul To: users@httpd.apache.org Sent: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 0:47 Subject: Re: [users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf Dear

Re: [users@httpd] mod_jk hasn't worked :FREE MEAL

There are NOT millions of people setting up Apache webservers.Multi million dollar hosting companies are using it to host millions of websites.using  Apache with front end setup software. Cpanel I took me two hours to setup Apache website running on my laptop and visible on the public

Re: [users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf

Dear BackButton.INVALID I have just invited you to make the acquaintance of my old friend Dave Null. With my apologies for top-posting, best regards all round, and please stay safe, Paul --- Tired old sys-admin On 2021-04-29 5:50 p.m., back Button wrote: My configuration hasn't worked to

Re: [users@httpd] mod_jk hasn't worked

If you think the product isn't developed to professional standards then why are you trying to use it? If you think the product isn't developed to professional standards then how could millions of others figure it out and use it to run their websites? If you want free support because you don't

Re: [users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf

My configuration hasn't worked to plugin mod_jk I don't have an error message.I know the path is not one of issues. So that was  a trivial a test  and it didn't tell me anything. back.but...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Eric Covener To: users@httpd.apache.org; back Button Sent:

Re: [users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf

My configuration hasn't worked to plugin mod_jk I don't have an error message.I know the path is not one of issues. So that was  a trivial a test  and it didn't tell me anything.   back.but...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Eric Covener To: users@httpd.apache.org; back Button

Re: [users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf

Why don't you try it and see what happens? This list isn't your personal support list. Every message you send goes to many people who want to help users with real problems, not your questions that can all be answered by reading the documentation. Nick On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 5:12 PM back

Re: [users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 5:12 PM back Button wrote: > Apach2 version 2.4.46 > > Please see below the contents of the http.conf file with commented out > Include files. > > The path to the file httpd.conf is in /usr/local/apache2/conf/httpd.conf > not /usr/local/apache2/httpd.conf > > > I believe

[users@httpd] path to conf(s) in httpd.conf

Apach2 version 2.4.46 Please see below the contents of the http.conf file with commented out Include files. The path to the file httpd.conf is in /usr/local/apache2/conf/httpd.confnot /usr/local/apache2/httpd.conf I believe the paths of the Include files should be   #Include

[users@httpd] Rewrite Question.

I need some help. I have a cookie value that comes with a value of lang-cc that I need to use in a RewriteRule in the format of CC-LANG. I have tried setting two environment variables by backreferencing the cookie and using a regex. Admittedly, regex is not my strong skill. I am figuring that I

Re: [users@httpd] prebuilt mod_jk.so for apache2 2.4.46

Thanks FYI ./configure --with-apxs=/usr/local/apache2/bin/apxs ./configure --with-apxs=/usr/local/apache/bin/apxs back.but...@aol.com -Original Message- From: Dino Ciuffetti To: users@httpd.apache.org Sent: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:07 Subject: Re: [users@httpd] prebuilt mod_jk.so for

Re: [users@httpd] prebuilt mod_jk.so for apache2 2.4.46

Where am I likely to find mod_jk.so for apache 2.4.46 ? Download source code from here: https://tomcat.apache.org/download-connectors.cgi (https://tomcat.apache.org/download-connectors.cgi) I tried to build it, first attempt ./configure --with-apache=/home/pi/Downloads/httpd-2.4.46 You are

[users@httpd] prebuilt mod_jk.so for apache2 2.4.46

Where am I likely to find mod_jk.so  for apache 2.4.46 ? Thanks It is not located anywhere here. You should first have mod_jk.so (unix) or mod_jk.dll (Windows) installed in your Apache module directory (see your Apache documentation to locate it). Usual locations for modules directory on

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

Can you look at the Hello in the capture to see if it is OK? On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 11:43 AM Jim Albert wrote: > On 4/29/2021 11:11 AM, Liwei wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 22:36, Liwei wrote: > >> On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 21:06, Rob Emery > wrote: > >> -- 8< Snip 8< - > >>>

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

On 4/29/2021 11:11 AM, Liwei wrote: On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 22:36, Liwei wrote: On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 21:06, Rob Emery wrote: -- 8< Snip 8< - Yeah we actually already have that enabled in our access logs and we can see that the clients in question are using TLS1.2 when successful

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 22:36, Liwei wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 21:06, Rob Emery wrote: > -- 8< Snip 8< - > > > > Yeah we actually already have that enabled in our access logs and we can > > see that the clients in question are using TLS1.2 when successful (i.e. > > on the next

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 21:06, Rob Emery wrote: -- 8< Snip 8< - > > Yeah we actually already have that enabled in our access logs and we can > see that the clients in question are using TLS1.2 when successful (i.e. > on the next connection). However these connections that result in the

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

Assuming your site is public facing, give this evaluation a try and see if anything interesting is mentioned. https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/ It is indeed public and I've just run that. Nothing strikes me as weird or unusual about it at all unfortunately:

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

On 4/29/2021 9:06 AM, Rob Emery wrote: Hiya Jim Thanks for the reply. If not already included, you could include %{SSL_PROTOCOL}x %{SSL_CIPHER}x in your request log and see if there is any commonality in requests assuming the communication is open long enough for the logging to occur or if

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

Hiya Jim Thanks for the reply. > If not already included, you could include %{SSL_PROTOCOL}x %{SSL_CIPHER}x in your request log and see if there is any commonality in requests assuming the communication is open long enough for the logging to occur or if the client's desired protocol and

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

On 4/29/2021 8:25 AM, Rob Emery wrote: Hello, We have a problem where intermittently users are getting a plaintext 400 Bad Request response in the middle of the TLS handshake (always the 6th packet in the TCP stream); it happens about 1 in 40K requests at current. As far as we can tell, there

Re: [users@httpd] Detailed Apache monitoring

Hi Richard, Thank you, I will look at the link you sent me “Nosso futuro é construído pelas decisões que tomamos e não pelas desculpas que damos.” (Tiago Brunet) Fábio Aragão Em quinta-feira, 29 de abril de 2021 09:08:20 BRT,

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

Hiya Nick, Thanks for the reply. > Do the clients that fail always fail? No, they work most of the time with the same settings (as confirmed with a friendly integrator). > Do they support the protocols you require? Yes, with the exact same configuration on the clients they work on the

Re: [users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

Do the clients that fail always fail? Do they support the protocols you require? Or are they trying to use a disabled protocol? Nick On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 8:26 AM Rob Emery wrote: > Hello, > > We have a problem where intermittently users are getting a plaintext > 400 Bad Request response

[users@httpd] Intermittently the TLS handshake results in plaintext 400 Bad Request response

Hello, We have a problem where intermittently users are getting a plaintext 400 Bad Request response in the middle of the TLS handshake (always the 6th packet in the TCP stream); it happens about 1 in 40K requests at current. As far as we can tell, there is no difference between a successful

Re: [users@httpd] Detailed Apache monitoring

Unless the queries to non-existent links are coming in very high volume they likely aren't your problem. See: for more details on logging options. > Date: Thursday, April 29, 2021 11:46:10 + > From: Fabio Aragao > > Hi Richard, >

Re: [users@httpd] Detailed Apache monitoring

Hi Richard, I monitored the error.log, I got to see a certain IP that was trying to search several links that do not exist on our site ... it was blocked.These parameters that you mentioned I insert in a configuration file?I'm sorry for the questions because I don't have the necessary knowledge