2008/9/22 Alex Rousskov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > It would help if there was a document describing what connection pinning > is and what are the known pitfalls. Do we have such a document? Is RFC > 4559 enough?
I'll take another read. I think we should look at documenting these sorts of features somewhere else though. > If not, Christos, can you write one and have Adrian and others > contribute pitfalls? It does not have to be long -- just a few > paragraphs describing the basics of the feature. We can add that > description to code documentation too. I'd be happy to help troll over the 2.X code and see what its doing. Henrik and Steven know the code better than I do; I've just spent some time figuring out how it interplays with load balancing to peers and such. > ICAP and eCAP do not care about HTTP connections or custom headers. Is > connection pinning more than connection management via some custom > headers? Nope; it just changes the semantics a little and some code may assume things work a certain way. > Sine NTLM authentication forwarding appears to be a required feature for > many and since connection pinning patch is not trivial (but is not huge > either), I would rather see it added now (after the proper review > process, of course). It could be the right icing on 3.1 cake for many > users. I do realize that, like any 900-line patch, it may cause problems > even if it is reviewed and tested. *nodnod* I'm just making sure the reasons for pushing it through are recorded somewhere during the process. Adrian
