httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: NOTE: Intent to T&R 2.2.6 tomorrow
Date Tue, 12 Nov 2013 21:03:50 GMT
I "just" added it to the backport proposal for
2.4... If there is sufficient support for adding
in 2.2 then I guess there will be enough for 2.4.
Go ahead and add to STATUS and we'll see...

On Nov 12, 2013, at 3:55 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:56:39 -0600
> "William A. Rowe Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:48:16 -0500
>> Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I intend to T&R 2.2.26 tomorrow... post now if that's
>>> an issue or problem...
>> 
>> As I mentioned earlier, two additional patches should possibly be
>> considered for protocol correctness.  The first you shepherded into
>> trunk, so I'm particularly interested in your thoughts on backporting
>> this, Jim...
>> 
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1524192
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1524770
>> (Note that the commit log message is missing patch attribution)
>> 
>> A backport is attached, as best as I've figured from the trunk-modulo-
>> 2.2 code path.
>> 
>> The second is the 100-continue behavior, when proxy-interim-response
>> is set to RFC.  As Yann noted in a very long and winding message
>> thread, the core http filter is pushing a 100 continue interim
>> status, and then mod_proxy_http is pushing back yet another interim
>> status response.  The core status response must be suppressed on
>> proxy-interim-response RFC requests.
>> 
>> It's not clear where that discussion thread has ended up, or whether
>> there is a usable patch to enforce this behavior.  As you had the most
>> to contribute to that thread, can you give us your thoughts on its
>> current status, Jim?
> 
> Let's let the question of adopting either or both of these changes
> expire at the end of the day.  If there is no strong support for
> picking up either or both of these in 2.4.7, they can be pended for
> some later release.
> 
> Committers - your thoughts?<httpd-2.2-r1524192-r1524770-TE-CL.patch>


Mime
View raw message