Re: [Pound Mailing List] HTTP 1/1 100-continue
Joe Gooch <[email protected]> Wed, 22 Jun 2016 12:42:31 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.pound.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I don't know enough about expect continue to know what we should do. Based on this: https://support.urbanairship.com/entries/59909909--Expect-100-Continue-Issues-and-Risks It seems like something I wouldn't ever use. Anytime I've run into it in the past it has been to disable it. Based on the above, if pound isn't going to support it, returning code 417 Expectation failed is probably the correct thing to do, instead of silently dropping the header. (Which would only be a valid course of action for GET requests). Is that what's happening, or do you have an incoming post request that never completes? Joe On Jun 22, 2016, at 4:23 AM, Emilio Campos <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Some advise? Any information will be appreciated 2016-06-19 19:54 GMT+02:00 Emilio Campos <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: We are currrently working with pound 2.8a, Joe's version from github and everything works like a charm, but after a few days ago a customer requested us a issue with some transfers. After a review we detected that they use HTTP 1/1 and some large request are sent from the client to server chunked and with header Expect: 100-continue, pound deletes this header and it looks like after a few chunked sent to the backend, the backend sends a unexpected "FIN,ACK" to pound and it closes the communication unexpectedly. I have been reading the code and pound delete this header also I found this in http.c * we do NOT support the "Expect: 100-continue" headers * support may involve severe performance penalties (non-responding back-end, etc) * as a stop-gap measure we just skip these headers Tinkering in google I found a patch for 2.6: https://bitbucket.org/amplidata/pound/src/f2affa5f867a9718c9dc864e5f1c2e0eddd91b9c/debian/patches/expect_100_continued.patch?at=default&fileviewer=file-view-default I would like to know if this could be added in the master branch, we could make tests to support it. -- Load balancer distribution - Open Source Project http://www.zenloadbalancer.com Distribution list (subscribe): zenloadbalancer-support-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uv+2+P5yyue3@public.gmane.orgt<mailto:zenloadbalancer-support-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org> -- Load balancer distribution - Open Source Project http://www.zenloadbalancer.com Distribution list (subscribe): zenloadbalancer-support-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uv+2+P5yyue3@public.gmane.orgt<mailto:zenloadbalancer-support-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>