Mailing List Archive

Hi,

I just noticed on a varnishd 1.0.2 setup that X-Forwarded-For gets
set if I do not send a cookie, but not if a cookie exists.

Is that an architectural/design/rfc requirement or sth worth opening
a trac ticket for?

Regards,
Joerg
--
| /"\ ASCII ribbon | GnuPG Key ID | e86d b753 3deb e749 6c3a |
| \ / campaign against | 0xbbcaad24 | 5706 1f7d 6cfd bbca ad24 |
| X HTML in email | .the next sentence is true. |
| / \ and news | .the previous sentence was a lie. |

In message <20061205153155.6f9ef11c at loki.starkstrom.lan>, Joerg Pernfuss writes:
>
>Hi,
>
>I just noticed on a varnishd 1.0.2 setup that X-Forwarded-For gets
>set if I do not send a cookie, but not if a cookie exists.
>
>Is that an architectural/design/rfc requirement or sth worth opening
>a trac ticket for?

Yes, please do.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

In message <20061205153155.6f9ef11c at loki.starkstrom.lan>, Joerg Pernfuss writes:
>
>Hi,
>
>I just noticed on a varnishd 1.0.2 setup that X-Forwarded-For gets
>set if I do not send a cookie, but not if a cookie exists.
>
>Is that an architectural/design/rfc requirement or sth worth opening
>a trac ticket for?

Yes, please do.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.