Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-bugs-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 39902 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2005 22:08:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Dec 2005 22:08:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 39525 invoked by uid 500); 7 Dec 2005 22:08:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-bugs-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 39484 invoked by uid 500); 7 Dec 2005 22:08:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact bugs-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: Reply-To: "Apache HTTPD Bugs Notification List" List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list bugs@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 39468 invoked by uid 99); 7 Dec 2005 22:08:31 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=10.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [192.87.106.226] (HELO ajax.apache.org) (192.87.106.226) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 07 Dec 2005 14:08:31 -0800 Received: by ajax.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 99) id 2F1BB186; Wed, 7 Dec 2005 23:08:09 +0100 (CET) From: bugzilla@apache.org To: bugs@httpd.apache.org Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34716] - ProxyPass results in Bad Request X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <20051207220809.2F1BB186@ajax.apache.org> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 23:08:09 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG� RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND� INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34716 ------- Additional Comments From edwin.meester@qme.nl 2005-12-07 23:08 ------- (In reply to comment #23) > You are all clear in the understanding that the various 'firewall' software > products, anti-virus 'internet protection', and other add ins all insert > themselves into the network socket stack? > > Some of the vendors of this software haven't implemented (correctly) the > entire WinSock2 advanced API. You can test this by completely disabling > the product and rebooting the machine, and if that fails, uninstalling the > product, rebooting and retesting. > > Also there are several options which cripple Apache to use older API's that > are less likely to demonstrate these bugs in 3rd party socket stack drivers, > you can try adding these directives globally to your server, one at a time, > and report back which directive did resolve this double-headers bug; > > Win32DisableAcceptEx > EnableSendfile off > EnableMMap off > > I'm not excluding the possibility of a bug, but trying to narrow down under > what conditions the bug might exhibit itself, and at least getting your > servers up and operating. > > Those others who see this flaw, what extra software (MS Firewall, AV products, > etc) are you running on the sockets? > > Ok thanks for the hints. Found the problem, my virusscanner (NOD32 2.50.25 mod: IMON) was messing up the headers. Apache (mod_proxy) is working perfect now. Thanks Again. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org