You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> on 2002/03/07 04:49:08 UTC
Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/docs/manual/mod mod_usertrack.xml
On 7 Mar 2002 rbowen@apache.org wrote:
> rbowen 02/03/06 19:46:33
>
> Added: docs/manual/mod mod_usertrack.xml
> Log:
> Conversion to XML
Does it strike anyone else but me as odd that the docs for this module
consist, in large part, of an email message from 1998. It seems that we
could do better than just pasting this email in here, and actuall
explain the situation a little. Thoughts? Are we somehow bound to quote
this message in order to credit the author?
>
> Revision Changes Path
> 1.1 httpd-2.0/docs/manual/mod/mod_usertrack.xml
>
> Index: mod_usertrack.xml
> ===================================================================
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <!DOCTYPE modulesynopsis SYSTEM "../style/modulesynopsis.dtd">
> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="../style/manual.xsl"?>
>
> <modulesynopsis>
> <name>mod_usertrack</name>
> <description>
> This module uses cookies to provide for a
> <em>clickstream</em> log of user activity on a site.
> </description>
> <status>Extension</status>
> <sourcefile>mod_usertrack.c</sourcefile>
> <identifier>usertrack_module</identifier>
> <compatibility>Known as mod_cookies prior to Apache 1.3.</compatibility>
>
> <summary>
>
> <h2>Summary</h2>
>
> <p>Previous releases of Apache have included a module which
> generates a 'clickstream' log of user activity on a site using
> cookies. This was called the "cookies" module, mod_cookies. In
> Apache 1.2 and later this module has been renamed the "user
> tracking" module, mod_usertrack. This module has been
> simplified and new directives added.</p>
> </summary>
>
>
> <section>
> <title>Logging</title>
>
> <p>Previously, the cookies module (now the user tracking
> module) did its own logging, using the <tt>CookieLog</tt>
> directive. In this release, this module does no logging at all.
> Instead, a configurable log format file should be used to log
> user click-streams. This is possible because the logging module
> now allows multiple log files. The cookie itself is logged by
> using the text <tt>%{cookie}n</tt> in the log file format. For
> example:</p>
> <example>
> CustomLog logs/clickstream "%{cookie}n %r %t"
> </example>
>
> <p>For backward compatibility the configurable log module
> implements the old <tt>CookieLog</tt> directive, but this
> should be upgraded to the above <tt>CustomLog</tt> directive. </p>
> </section>
>
> <section>
> <title>2-digit or 4-digit dates for cookies?</title>
>
> <p>(the following is from message
> <022701bda43d$9d32bbb0$1201a8c0@christian.office.sane.com>
> in the new-httpd archives)
> <pre>
> From: "Christian Allen" <christian@sane.com>
> Subject: Re: Apache Y2K bug in mod_usertrack.c
> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:41:56 -0400
>
> Did some work with cookies and dug up some info that might be useful.
>
> True, Netscape claims that the correct format NOW is four digit dates, and
> four digit dates do in fact work... for Netscape 4.x (Communicator), that
> is. However, 3.x and below do NOT accept them. It seems that Netscape
> originally had a 2-digit standard, and then with all of the Y2K hype and
> probably a few complaints, changed to a four digit date for Communicator.
> Fortunately, 4.x also understands the 2-digit format, and so the best way to
> ensure that your expiration date is legible to the client's browser is to
> use 2-digit dates.
>
> However, this does not limit expiration dates to the year 2000; if you use
> an expiration year of "13", for example, it is interpreted as 2013, NOT
> 1913! In fact, you can use an expiration year of up to "37", and it will be
> understood as "2037" by both MSIE and Netscape versions 3.x and up (not sure
> about versions previous to those). Not sure why Netscape used that
> particular year as its cut-off point, but my guess is that it was in respect
> to UNIX's 2038 problem. Netscape/MSIE 4.x seem to be able to understand
> 2-digit years beyond that, at least until "50" for sure (I think they
> understand up until about "70", but not for sure).
>
> Summary: Mozilla 3.x and up understands two digit dates up until "37"
> (2037). Mozilla 4.x understands up until at least "50" (2050) in 2-digit
> form, but also understands 4-digit years, which can probably reach up until
> 9999. Your best bet for sending a long-life cookie is to send it for some
> time late in the year "37".
> </pre>
> </p>
> </section>
>
> <directivesynopsis>
> <name>CookieDomain</name>
> <syntax>CookieDomain <i>domain</i></syntax>
> <default>None</default>
> <contextlist>
> <context>server config</context>
> <context>virtual host</context>
> <context>directory</context>
> <context>.htaccess</context>
> </contextlist>
> <description>controls the setting of the domain to which
> the tracking cookie applies.</description>
>
> <usage>
>
> <p>This directive controls the setting of the domain to which
> the tracking cookie applies. If not present, no domain is
> included in the cookie header field.</p>
>
> <p>The domain string <b>must</b> begin with a dot, and
> <b>must</b> include at least one embedded dot. That is,
> ".foo.com" is legal, but "foo.bar.com" and ".com" are not.</p>
> </usage>
> </directivesynopsis>
>
>
> <directivesynopsis>
> <name>CookieExpires</name>
> <syntax>CookieExpires <em>expiry-period</em></syntax>
> <default></default>
> <contextlist>
> <context>server config</context>
> <context>virtual host</context>
> <context>directory</context>
> <context>.htaccess</context>
> </contextlist>
> <override></override>
> <compatibility>In 1.3.20 and earlier, not usable in directory and
> .htaccess</compatibility>
>
> <usage>
> <p>When used, this directive sets an expiry time on the cookie
> generated by the usertrack module. The <em>expiry-period</em>
> can be given either as a number of seconds, or in the format
> such as "2 weeks 3 days 7 hours". Valid denominations are:
> years, months, weeks, hours, minutes and seconds. If the expiry
> time is in any format other than one number indicating the
> number of seconds, it must be enclosed by double quotes.</p>
>
> <p>If this directive is not used, cookies last only for the
> current browser session.</p>
> </usage>
> </directivesynopsis>
>
> <directivesynopsis>
> <name>CookieName</name>
> <syntax>CookieName <em>token</em></syntax>
> <default>Apache</default>
> <contextlist>
> <context>server config</context>
> <context>virtual host</context>
> <context>directory</context>
> <context>.htaccess</context>
> </contextlist>
>
> <usage>
> <p>This directive allows you to change the name of the cookie
> this module uses for its tracking purposes. By default the
> cookie is named "<code>Apache</code>".</p>
>
> <p>You must specify a valid cookie name; results are
> unpredictable if you use a name containing unusual characters.
> Valid characters include A-Z, a-z, 0-9, "_", and "-".</p>
> </usage>
> </directivesynopsis>
>
> <directivesynopsis>
> <name>CookieStyle</name>
> <syntax>CookieStyle
> <i>Netscape|Cookie|Cookie2|RFC2109|RFC2965</i></syntax>
> <default></default>
> <contextlist>
> <context>server config</context>
> <context>virtual host</context>
> <context>directory</context>
> <context>.htaccess</context>
> </contextlist>
> <description>Controls the format of the cookie header
> field</description>
>
> <usage>
> <p>This directive controls the format of the cookie header
> field. The three formats allowed are:</p>
>
> <ul>
> <li><b>Netscape</b>, which is the original but now deprecated
> syntax. This is the default, and the syntax Apache has
> historically used.</li>
>
> <li><b>Cookie</b> or <b>RFC2109</b>, which is the syntax that
> superseded the Netscape syntax.</li>
>
> <li><b>Cookie2</b> or <b>RFC2965</b>, which is the most
> current cookie syntax.</li>
> </ul>
>
> <p>Not all clients can understand all of these formats. but you
> should use the newest one that is generally acceptable to your
> users' browsers.</p>
> </usage>
> </directivesynopsis>
>
>
>
> <directivesynopsis>
> <name>CookieTracking</name>
> <syntax>CookieTracking on|off</syntax>
> <default></default>
> <contextlist>
> <context>server config</context>
> <context>virtual host</context>
> <context>directory</context>
> <context>.htaccess</context>
> </contextlist>
> <override>FileInfo</override>
>
> <usage>
> <p>When the user track module is compiled in, and
> "CookieTracking on" is set, Apache will start sending a
> user-tracking cookie for all new requests. This directive can
> be used to turn this behavior on or off on a per-server or
> per-directory basis. By default, compiling mod_usertrack will
> not activate cookies. </p>
>
> </usage>
> </directivesynopsis>
>
> </modulesynopsis>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Who can say where the road goes
Where the day flows
Only time
--Pilgrim (Enya - A Day Without Rain)
Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/docs/manual/mod mod_usertrack.xml
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Rich Bowen wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2002 rbowen@apache.org wrote:
>
> > rbowen 02/03/06 19:46:33
> >
> > Added: docs/manual/mod mod_usertrack.xml
> > Log:
> > Conversion to XML
>
> Does it strike anyone else but me as odd that the docs for this module
> consist, in large part, of an email message from 1998. It seems that we
> could do better than just pasting this email in here, and actuall
> explain the situation a little. Thoughts? Are we somehow bound to quote
> this message in order to credit the author?
I think that the email is there on the principal that "quick and dirty
docs are better than no docs". If we can improve on it, I don't think
there is a problem in removing it.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org