[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Martin Stecher wrote:
> For clarification:
> Wont-Look-Body: 0 is NOT a good value for URL blocking tools.
> Actually the Wont-Look-Body parameter for NR cannot be used by URL
> blocking servies at all (unless they block all requests).
> Reason: Depending on the URL, the service will either send the
> request back unchanged or it will short-circuit and send back an
> error message. Thus, it will need to wait for the request-header
> part and then decide whether it sends a DWO message or a DWLY
> message. Because Wont-Look-Body: 0 means to behave as if DWLY is
> sent for all transactions, it cannot be used here.
The above looks correct to me.
It looks like Wont-Look-Body in NR is only useful for services that
generate responses from scratch, possibly based on header and meta
info. Such services may be useful if they are activated based on some
dynamic conditions (errors, blocked pages, overload, etc.). For
example, perhaps the service that blocks is different from the service
that generates the final "your transaction has been blocked" response
in a user-friendly language.