Hi Michael, I'm verry happy that the bug was fixed: http://varnish-cache.org/ticket/733
Is there a Varnish's git/svn repository somewhere with the fix? Thanks guys ;-) -- Regards Zabrane 2010/8/8 Michael Alger <[email protected]>: > On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 05:43:03PM +0200, zabrane Mikael wrote: >> >> As I wrote it before, accessing our backend directly with "curl" >> or any web browser worked for us for years now. Here's an example: >> >> $ curl -0 -D - -v -I --no-keepalive --proxy 127.0.0.1:7676 >> http://www.groupama.fr/ >> Date Tue, 15 Jun 2010 09:18:29 GMT >> Content-Type text/html; charset=UTF-8 >> X-Powered-By ASP.NET >> Set-Cookie >> jsessionid=MXFJmqLZ2cwnR1gyFhVDvzG59zx2KcP2vKcg6lNP4Gnz5nVky4D1!1556069365; >> path=/ >> [...] >> >>> It seems like Varnish is only adding the erroneous header when it is >>> using your "caching backend", yes? (i.e. the thing on port 7676) >> >> Yep, only with our backend. >> >>> Would capturing the traffic Varnish sees with tcpdump and comparing >>> the two (squid and the caching backend) be feasible? >> >> with wireshark, it's my first time using it (please, see enclosed files). > > Sorry, I was more interested in the actual data of the response. > Presumably Varnish is interpreting the response from squid > differently to the response from the caching backend. > > Or, is there a way for us to see the response from the backend? Is > the site http://www.groupama.fr/ currently served by the caching > backend, i.e. if I point a Varnish at it I should see the same bug? > > _______________________________________________ > varnish-misc mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.varnish-cache.org/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc > _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.varnish-cache.org/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
