httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com>
Subject Re: ping for http in mod_proxy
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:04:42 GMT
 

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jim Jagielski [mailto:jim@jaguNET.com] 
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2008 18:55
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: ping for http in mod_proxy
> 
> 
> On Feb 13, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> >> Von: Jim Jagielski
> >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2008 17:07
> >> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> >> Betreff: ping for http in mod_proxy
> >>
> >> I've started looking at adding "ping" support for
> >> mod_proxy_http to complement whats in mod_proxy_ajp...
> >> The idea is to send a simple OPTIONS * to the backend
> >> and hope for a reply.
> >>
> >> The rub is that I've been working on 2 separate
> >> implementations: one talks direct to the socket and the
> >> other basically tries to do what ap_proxy_http_request()
> >> and ap_proxy_http_process_response() does, as far
> >> as using brigades, etc... The former is much further
> >> along, btw.
> >
> > We cannot use the socket approach since we need to be able to
> > handle SSL backend connections and this requires the brigades -  
> > filters
> > approach.
> 
> The initial approach was to not honor SSL connections and
> just ignore that... The idea that we really want a fast and
> dirty "Are you there" flag, so to avoid as much overhead
> as possible...

Sorry for my I-want-it-all-at-once approach :-). But this leaves
the problems (most notably PR 37770) open for SSL backend connection
(which would be a pity). So IMHO the socket approach would be only a first step.

Regards

Rüdiger

Mime
View raw message