Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of minfrin@sharp.fm designates
 174.143.229.200 as permitted sender)
References: 
 <CAKUrXK7J4Pj58X6uUn4yUCrAbLxTxdbWnAzKmMhf5FOC70QKKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20120719153831.GA5633@samfundet.no> <20120719172623.3a29b1b7@baldur>
 <8A1879E2-8784-4E4A-82BB-B4A605C28D43@jellybaby.net>
In-Reply-To: <8A1879E2-8784-4E4A-82BB-B4A605C28D43@jellybaby.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Message-Id: <DB998470-6F06-400F-BFC3-C53F9AAF97AB@sharp.fm>
Cc: "dev@httpd.apache.org" <dev@httpd.apache.org>
From: Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm>
Subject: Re: mpm-itk and upstream Apache, once again
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 18:22:07 +0100
To: "dev@httpd.apache.org" <dev@httpd.apache.org>

On 19 Jul 2012, at 18:07, Tim Bannister <isoma@jellybaby.net> wrote:

> On 19 Jul 2012, at 17:26, Nick Kew wrote:
>=20
>>> 2. Fixes to get Apache to drop the connection if it detects (during .hta=
ccess lookup) that it would need to change the uid.
>>=20
>> Dropping the connection gratuitously breaks HTTP, and so has no place in h=
ttpd (of course, a third-party module sets its own rules). Would it need a c=
ore patch to return an Internal Server Error (500)?
>=20
> Vanilla httpd does this all the time=E2=80=A6 after a timed-out keepalive.=
 The client cannot make any assumptions about the configured timeout, and ca=
n't tell whether the dropped connection is due to a genuine timeout or a UID=
 mismatch between the previous and current request.

I would hate to have to troubleshoot this - two completely independent behav=
iors, with the same symptom but completely different cause.

Nick is right, a 500 is the right thing to do here.

Regards,
Graham
--