httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: AP_CONN_CLOSE on force-response-1.0
Date Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:25:58 GMT

On Oct 10, 2007, at 6:01 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:

> On Tuesday 09 October 2007 22:49:38 Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>      http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=78967
>>
>> That's a 1997 date, btw :)
>
> There were no word about broken browsers in that commit, only about  
> broken
> proxy. ;)
>
> On Tuesday 09 October 2007 22:41:19 Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I can't see changing the behavior now, after all these years.
>> If we want to create a variant that maintains the feasibility of
>> keepalives, then a big +1 for that, but it should be a new
>> envvar, not changing the userland experience of an existing one...
>
> And if browser asks explicitly for Keep-Alive, why not to satisfy  
> it? You
> should keep in mind that implicit behaviour is 'Connection: Close'  
> for 1.0
> protocol. I think, new envvar will add unnecessary complexity to
> configuration and redundant processing to servers...
>

And I think changing the behavior of an existing envvar from
how it's been used for ~10years is *sure* to create *more* confusion.

Mime
View raw message