httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: [STATUS] (apache-1.2) Wed Jun 10 23:45:28 EDT 1998
Date Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:59:52 GMT
If the microsoft proxy bug (can't remember the PR off the top of my head)
turns out to be a protocol problem, then yes I think a 1.2.7 is worth it.

At the moment I'm tempted to ignore that bug though.  Microsoft's proxy is
broken in my opinion, and if they forgot to test it with the web server
w/50% market share... well, they deserve the unreliability they get.

The bug is that Apache will keep a persistent connection when it sends a
304 response (and it'll say "Connection: keep-alive" if it was a 1.0
client).  Which is fine, 304 responses have no body, and so the body
length is known to the client.  HTTP/1.1 clients definately handle this. 
Netscape Navigator definately handles this.  Microsoft's proxy appears to
get confused -- it doesn't recognize that the connection is kept-alive
even though the headers say it.  So it sits there twiddling its thumbs
waiting for the server's keepalive timeout.

Dean

On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, Manoj Kasichainula wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 10, 1998 at 11:45:29PM -0400, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> > The main goal for 1.2.7 is stability.
> 
> IS there still going to be a 1.2.7? With a 1.3.x version out, it may
> be time to retire this tree.
> 
> -- 
> Manoj Kasichainula - manojk at io dot com - http://www.io.com/~manojk/
> "Tandems are good if you need hardware which sucks reliably, 24x365."
>   -- Malcolm Ray.
> 


Mime
View raw message