Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/262#issuecomment-128275994
@SolidWallOfCode @jpeach are you guys okay with this current iteration? If
we don't have any objections I'll get this merged.
---
If your project is set up for it,
GitHub user zizhong opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271
TS-3828: HEAD requests hang when origin returns Transfer-Encoding: Chunked
When a client makes a HEAD request and the origin returns a header
containing Transfer-Encoding: chunked or Content-
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128352032
I worked with @zizhong on this patch and so obviously I give it a +1.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear o
Hi everyone,
Thanks to everyone for helping, and being patient, with the master <-> 6.0.0
cleanup. I think we’ve got the tree to a state now where it’s reasonably
stable, and usable. Therefor, master is once again open for all commits. Note
that, as usual, master should always be considered sta
> On Aug 5, 2015, at 4:10 AM, Bret Palsson wrote:
>
> The problem with reloading SSL configuration is if there is a problem with
> one of your certs, say a permission issue, ATS will unload all the certs
> from the running process and still accept traffic causing SSL errors.
That sounds like a
> On Aug 5, 2015, at 10:16 AM, James Peach wrote:
>
>
>> On Aug 5, 2015, at 8:22 AM, Susan Hinrichs
>> wrote:
>>
>> I would argue that the specification of the session ticket key in the
>> ssl_multicert.config file is inappropriate at least as the primary
>> mechanism. It seems that for t
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128445110
This seems reasonable to me as well. If I understand this, basically you
are saying, if we expect no body, also explicitly ignore any transfer encoding?
---
If you
> On Aug 6, 2015, at 9:56 AM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>
>
>> On Aug 5, 2015, at 10:16 AM, James Peach wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 5, 2015, at 8:22 AM, Susan Hinrichs
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would argue that the specification of the session ticket key in the
>>> ssl_multicert.config file is inappro
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:08 AM, James Peach wrote:
>
> > On Aug 6, 2015, at 9:56 AM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Aug 5, 2015, at 10:16 AM, James Peach wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Aug 5, 2015, at 8:22 AM, Susan Hinrichs <
> shinr...@network-geographics.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I would arg
> On Aug 6, 2015, at 5:17 AM, Sunil Vasanta
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Planing to write a ICAP client plugin for ATS. Before starting this activity
> just wanted to know has some started working on this ? or is
> there any code available for this already.
Cool. Yes, someone told us about 1.5 year
Github user sudheerv commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128454326
I've a small concern/question on the patch.
the RFC for HEAD method says:
"The server SHOULD send the same header fields in response to a HEAD
r
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128482080
Other HTTP servers do send the Content-Length on HEAD requests; I think
that we should do the same.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this em
Github user zizhong commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128524834
great points. Actually this patch will send the content length. The content
length modified is only in the Http State structure but not in the real
HDRs. Th
Github user sudheerv commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128529543
Thanks @zizhong - that's nice to hear. Needless to say, I'm :+1: on the
patch :)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128533986
Great, I'm glad everyone is on board. Zizhong actually made sure to add a
test to validate the case where the server sends a content-length. But I do see
now that i
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271#issuecomment-128559255
I've merged this into master, I'll now backport it to 6.0.x
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub a
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/271
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature
Hi all,
gentle reminder for everyone. And this is important, to not get all these
incredibly ugly merge commits over and over again (which also makes RM’ing much
harder to find the necessary back port commits):
1) Always run git pull —rebase before pushing upstream. It can almost always
(some
18 matches
Mail list logo
