httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Hartill <>
Subject Re: patch 90g
Date Sun, 11 Feb 1996 18:41:16 GMT
> Hmmm.... just on general design principles, we might want to be a
> little careful about *how* scripts requirest a particular buffer size
> (if we do give them that capability).  Specifically, it might be good
> to adopt some sort of a naming convention for this, and any other new
> CGI-specific headers we create, which distinguishes them from whatever
> headers are to be added to the MIME headers of the server's response.  

Mmmmm, how about if the server gives the client a prefix that it's
willing to intercept in responses, e.g.

Apache calls a CGI script and gives it an ENV VAR of "For_Server_Prefix=Apache",
then the CGI script knows that anything it sends to to the server prefixed
by "Apache" will be intercepted (not sent to client) and then processed
if the server understands it. An example.....

Server   "For_Server_Prefix=Apache" -> CGI
CGI      "Apache: buffer-output-size=0"  -> Server
Server   "" -> Client

Some bright spark on this list can write us a module that intercepts
the CGI->server headers and acts on them.

At least with this method, if some other server writer thinks our
header naming convention sucks, they can use something else, and CGI
can be made smart enough to realise there's no prefix given and so
it's talking to a ye olde server that can't deal with these headers.

So, other than changing buffer sizes (if people (e.g. Brian) can warm to it),
what other types of CGI -> Server information could be useful?
Rob's log-comments example looks interesing (especially when used with
more sophisticated logging module).

Hmmm, one could write password protected CGI that could request 
reconfiguration of the server, e.g.

Apache: admin-request=restart&password=theboss
Apache: admin-request=SpareServer -3&password=webmaster

Warning, warning... entering fantasy land.. warning warning.


View raw message