Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 23985 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2004 04:07:36 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Aug 2004 04:07:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 32472 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2004 04:07:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 32437 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2004 04:07:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 32424 invoked by uid 99); 15 Aug 2004 04:07:26 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [128.195.24.168] (HELO scotch.ics.uci.edu) (128.195.24.168) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:07:23 -0700 Received: from mvata-64-75.cruznet.ucsc.edu (scotch.ics.uci.edu [128.195.24.168]) (authenticated bits=0) by scotch.ics.uci.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i7F47H2q023149 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:07:20 -0700 From: Justin Erenkrantz To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: Increasing LimitRequestFieldsize Message-ID: <3C28CC9DDB79251DFC2C3250@[10.0.1.11]> In-Reply-To: <16A24B6050584143978000646801E935022BCA65@cacexc03.americas.cpqcorp.net> References: <16A24B6050584143978000646801E935022BCA65@cacexc03.americas.cpqcorp .net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.0-pre1-r21475 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0-pre1-r21475 (2004-06-19) on scotch.ics.uci.edu X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N --On Friday, August 13, 2004 10:02 AM -0700 "Mathihalli, Madhusudan" wrote: > I was wondering if there's any potential harm in increasing the > LimitRequestFieldsize from it's current value of 8k to something more > (like 32k). Instances that need to support larger header sizes can set the directive, so I don't know why we should make the default larger. Is there a compelling reason to do so? -- justin