Grant <suppressed> wrote:
> > > Does anyone have any more info on why SocketReadTimeout came into
> > > being? Is it designed to solve some broken pipe problems?
> > >
> > One of the core developers discovered that there are some ssl proxy
> > servers on a particular ISP that take longer to respond than the
> > (previously hard-coded) 1 second default. If you have this problem with
> > some of your customers then setting this value to something higher than
> > 5 or so will allow those proxy servers to work. On the downside it can
> > also make IC more vulnerable to a certain type of DOS attack so you
> > shouldn't adjust this unless you really need to.
> >
> Thanks Peter. How would that type of problem make itself known? ssl_error_log?
>
You'd get messages like "read: closed" in your global Interchange
error.log file. You can see the new directive's documentation here:
http://www.interchange.rtfm.info/icdocs/config/SocketReadTimeout.html
--
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/
_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ K e v i n W a l s h
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ suppressed
_/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/
_______________________________________________
interchange-users mailing list
suppressed
http://www.icdevgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/interchange-users
Mail converted by mhonarc 2.6.15
This archive provided courtesy of JSW4.NET, Internet Hosting Services for Small Business.