lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: khttpd
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>
> Followup to: <19990610132916.21924.qmail@convergence.de>
> By author: felix@convergence.de
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > In local.linux-kernel, you wrote:
> > > Why not give khttpd a devoted port? Why go to all these pains to dissect
> > > keep-alive connections and all that, when we can do <IMG
> > > SRC="http://my.server.net:81/banner.gif">? Is that just too easy for
> > > everyone? Is it because the benchmarks we were talking about would be able
> > > to use something like that?
> >
> > Recent squid versions disallow port 81 through the proxy, so people will
> > see broken images.
> >
>
> What about the ports 8000 and 8080, both of which are frequently used
> for http? (If Squid blocks them all, I would consider that a bug in
> Squid.)

By default, Squid blocks everything but 80, 21, 443, 563, 70, 210 and
1025-65535... but then again, by default squid blocks connections from all hosts
to force you to change the configuration defaults :)

Actually, Squid can be used to automatically rewrite URL's to forward to khttpd
for connections quite easily when using Squid as a web accelerator.



Jordan

--
Jordan Mendelson : http://jordy.wserv.com
Web Services, Inc. : http://www.wserv.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.097 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site