[STATUS] (httpd-proxy) Wed Aug 8 23:45:35 EDT 2001

[Rodent of Unusual Size <Ke...@Golux.Com>]

HTTPD PROXY STATUS:
Last modified at [$Date: 2001/08/03 21:35:24 $]

Release:

intended for 1.3/2.0 release date

httpd 1.3.x)

   Source for HTTP/1.1 mod_proxy is now available
    in httpd-proxy/module-1.0/ via CVS
   Note: this code now maintains binary compatibility

   first HTTP/1.1 support patch complete; available at
   http://dev.apache.org/dist/patches/apply_to_1.3.19/

   Current HTTP/1.1 patch at
   http://dev.apache.org/dist/patches/apply_to_1.3-current

httpd 2.0)

   work ongoing
   Graham's patches for httpd-2.0 committed

httpd 2.0+)

   email block diagrams exchanged, and clarified a little
   talk about these at ApacheCon AFA a new proxy and cache design
       got good feedback from Theo and Ian

RELEASE SHOWSTOPPERS:

a), b), c) below.

2.0

   * problems with akamai proxies - under investigation
      This problem is fixed on FreeBSD 4.3 and Linux 2.2 as of 6/26/01
   * Something involving the PROXY_DECLARE declarations keeps
     the proxy from working as a DSO on AIX.
   * Remove the last bits of non-threadsafe code. inet_ntoa springs to mind.

RELEASE NON-SHOWSTOPPERS BUT WOULD BE REAL NICE TO WRAP THESE UP:

1.3.x

    * Ronald Tschaler's patch to mod_proxy to allow other modules to
      set headers too (needed by mod_auth_digest)
        Message-ID: <19...@chill.innovation.ch>
        Status: TBD
    * announce to current-testers@ to get some looking at
    * possibly to fold this into a later release (1.3.20++?)
      currently being maintained as a separate code base + patch
    * Bill Rowe's suggested fix for Win32 - done
    * Kwindla Kramer's patches for downstream cache control
        Message-ID: <15...@khk.allafrica.com>
        Status: under consideration
    * Luis Londono's mod_ssl post patch to fix up after mod_ssl installed
        Message-ID: <01...@nisbic.com>
        Status: this needs to go to the mod_ssl guys

2.0

   * announce to current-testers@ to get some looking at

   * Audit all calls to ap_[get,pass]_brigade, and check that
     the return values are inspected and acted upon correctly.
     As it is, we blithely ignore FAR too many of these calls.
     General return code audit would be nice too...

   * problems when streaming mp3 from live365.com, and audio stream dies
     and reconnects - we seem to be hanging on the stream close, since
     the client (iTunes) may not be actually closing the connection
     (not believed to be an HTTP proxy problem)
   * Remove any and all code tied to IPv4, for IPv6 compatibility. Go looking
     for in_addr.
   * Possibly set SO_REUSEPORT in the ftp proxy, as some ftp servers may need
     it.
   * Possible proxy waiting scoreboard state

2.0+

    * none

Other known bugs that need fixing:

1.3.x

    * many PRs to be cleaned up

2.0

    * none

2.0+

    * none

Other features that need writing:

1.3.x

    * mod_rewrite and possibly mod_include cleanup

2.0

    * none

2.0+

    * none

Documentation that needs editing:

1.3.x

    * mod_proxy.html (needs a once-over)

2.0

    * mod_proxy.html

2.0+

    * none

Available Patches:

1.3.x

    * PR#3489 patch for NoCache/mod_rewrite problem

2.0

    * none

2.0+

    * none

Open Issues:

    * Eventual reintegration into httpd-2.0. The basic criteria are:
        a) The code compiles and runs as often as any code in the tree
        b) The functionality makes sense for an HTTP proxy
        c) There is an active maintainer who is or can become an ASF
           member.
    * announce to current-testers@ to get some looking at (1.3/2.0 both)
    * announce for inclusion vote and Graham commit privs - done (sort of)

Re: [STATUS] (httpd-proxy) Wed Aug 8 23:45:35 EDT 2001

[Chuck Murcko <ch...@topsail.org>]

My comments interspersed with Graham's.

On Thursday, August 9, 2001, at 04:18 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:

> Eli Marmor wrote:
>
>> I'll be grateful if you can answer me the following about the status of
>> mod_proxy in Apache-2.0.23:
>>
>> 1. Is it stable, more or less?  How does its stability compare to 
>> mod_proxy
>>    of 1.3?
>
> Until we can get it out in one of the betas there is no way of telling -
> though I don't have any reason to believe that it's not. There have been
> a steady stream of bugfixes and changes over the last few months, so it
> is receiving exposure.

Yes, it's become apparent that we're going stuck in a proxy 
change<--->core change deadly cycle that we need to expose better, hence 
the proxy CVS snapshots (see below). It's also time for tagged full 
source builds with mod_proxy included.

>
>> 2. Does it support HTTP/1.1?
>
> It is 100% HTTP/1.1 (and if it isn't it's a bug).
>
>> 3. Is there still any showstopper?
>
> Not that I aware of.
>
>> 4. Does it support ALL sites? (including problematic such as akamai, 
>> yahoo,
>>    etc.)
>
> It does for me - the showstoppers seem to have been caused by problems
> in various filters outside of the proxy. Needs more exposure to confirm
> though.
>

See above.

>> 5. How does it perform?  How does its performance compare to 1.3?
>
> No-one has really checked yet to my knowledge.
>
> Keep in mind though that the v2.0 proxy is just a proxy - there is no
> caching whatsoever - this is the job of a separate independant module
> called mod_tcache that is still in the works.
>
>> 6. How does it work with SSL turned on?
>
> Dunno - but if it doesn't it's a bug.
>

There's an experimantal mod_ssl proxy which uses mod_proxy. It's enabled 
by

--enable-rule=SSL_EXPERIMENTAL

with the other experimental parts of mod_ssl. Very untested.

>> If there are two versions of mod_proxy (as in 1.3), one that is 
>> included in
>> the standard source tree of Apache, and another one which is applied as
>> patches, please answer the above questions about both of the versions.
>
> There is only 1 version of the proxy for v2.0.
>
> The patch for v1.3 is an HTTP/1.1 patch that was never applied to v1.3
> because it was too big. (Unfortunately as much of the patch involves
> rewrites of a number of routines the patch only works as a unit).
>
>

There are CVS snapshots of both 1.3+mod_proxy-HTTP/1.1 and 2.0+mod_proxy 
in http://cvs.apache.org/builds/httpd-proxy/. Apr and apr-util are not 
included in the latter.

For 1.3 the hope is to slog through the existing proxy bugs, and fold in 
the HTTP/1.1 patch in a 1.3.21 or higher release (a "final" 1.3 release).

Chuck Murcko
Topsail Group
http://www.topsail.org/

Re: [STATUS] (httpd-proxy) Wed Aug 8 23:45:35 EDT 2001

[Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>]

Eli Marmor wrote:

> I'll be grateful if you can answer me the following about the status of
> mod_proxy in Apache-2.0.23:
> 
> 1. Is it stable, more or less?  How does its stability compare to mod_proxy
>    of 1.3?

Until we can get it out in one of the betas there is no way of telling -
though I don't have any reason to believe that it's not. There have been
a steady stream of bugfixes and changes over the last few months, so it
is receiving exposure.

> 2. Does it support HTTP/1.1?

It is 100% HTTP/1.1 (and if it isn't it's a bug).

> 3. Is there still any showstopper?

Not that I aware of.

> 4. Does it support ALL sites? (including problematic such as akamai, yahoo,
>    etc.)

It does for me - the showstoppers seem to have been caused by problems
in various filters outside of the proxy. Needs more exposure to confirm
though.

> 5. How does it perform?  How does its performance compare to 1.3?

No-one has really checked yet to my knowledge.

Keep in mind though that the v2.0 proxy is just a proxy - there is no
caching whatsoever - this is the job of a separate independant module
called mod_tcache that is still in the works.

> 6. How does it work with SSL turned on?

Dunno - but if it doesn't it's a bug.

> If there are two versions of mod_proxy (as in 1.3), one that is included in
> the standard source tree of Apache, and another one which is applied as
> patches, please answer the above questions about both of the versions.

There is only 1 version of the proxy for v2.0.

The patch for v1.3 is an HTTP/1.1 patch that was never applied to v1.3
because it was too big. (Unfortunately as much of the patch involves
rewrites of a number of routines the patch only works as a unit).

Regards,
Graham
-- 
-----------------------------------------
minfrin@sharp.fm		"There's a moon
					over Bourbon Street
						tonight..."

Re: [STATUS] (httpd-proxy) Wed Aug 8 23:45:35 EDT 2001

[Eli Marmor <ma...@netmask.it>]

Hi,

First let me apologize that I waste your expensive time with the following
question, while on the other hand I haven't contributed anything useful
lately (hopefully to be changed in the future...), due to lack of time.

We are all used to these procedural status messages, that at least in my
eyes are completely useless, due to their obsolence and for being *SO*
outdated.

However, the last message made me curious to know what is really going.

I'll be grateful if you can answer me the following about the status of
mod_proxy in Apache-2.0.23:

1. Is it stable, more or less?  How does its stability compare to mod_proxy
   of 1.3?
2. Does it support HTTP/1.1?
3. Is there still any showstopper?
4. Does it support ALL sites? (including problematic such as akamai, yahoo,
   etc.)
5. How does it perform?  How does its performance compare to 1.3?
6. How does it work with SSL turned on?

If there are two versions of mod_proxy (as in 1.3), one that is included in
the standard source tree of Apache, and another one which is applied as
patches, please answer the above questions about both of the versions.

And back to the "[STATUS]" message: Although I asked these questions
because of my own interest, having the answer for the above questions will
allow people like me to update the status file, and to make it useful.

Thanks,
-- 
Eli Marmor
marmor@netmask.it
CTO, Founder
Netmask (El-Mar) Internet Technologies Ltd.
__________________________________________________________
Tel.:   +972-9-766-1020          8 Yad-Harutzim St.
Fax.:   +972-9-766-1314          P.O.B. 7004
Mobile: +972-50-23-7338          Kfar-Saba 44641, Israel