Hello,
On 6/18/16 12:48 AM, jordan.davidson wrote:
> We need TCP (not http) hostname routing for an environment we are creating
> using k8s and ingress with the nginx ingress controller. We are trying to
> figure out if there is a way to create an nginx server with a config that
> will route TCP c
Hello,Edho Arief
sorry, just be not careful to understand.
It's ok now, thank again.
2016-06-20 13:55 GMT+08:00 Edho Arief :
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016, at 14:54, 二戒 wrote:
> > sorry. I have found my forum can't show attachment now.
> >
> > blow is the nginx vhost config fles, where is the mi
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016, at 14:54, 二戒 wrote:
> sorry. I have found my forum can't show attachment now.
>
> blow is the nginx vhost config fles, where is the mistake?
>
> thank you.
>
> server
> {
> listen 80;
> server_name www.cnprint.org;
> index index.php index.html index.htm;
> root /home
sorry. I have found my forum can't show attachment now.
blow is the nginx vhost config fles, where is the mistake?
thank you.
server
{
listen 80;
server_name www.cnprint.org;
index index.php index.html index.htm;
root /home/website/cnprint;
location /bbs/ {
rewrite ^/bbs/((urllist|sitemap_).*\
Edho Arief ,
*thank you very much.*
*it's work fine now.*
*have a good day, thank again.*
2016-06-20 13:30 GMT+08:00 Edho Arief :
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016, at 14:20, 二戒 wrote:
> > I think should this line "location ~* ^/bbs/attachment+\.php?$" has
> > mistake, but I can't resolve it.
> >
>
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016, at 14:20, 二戒 wrote:
> I think should this line "location ~* ^/bbs/attachment+\.php?$" has
> mistake, but I can't resolve it.
>
> location ~* ^/bbs/attachment+\.php?$
> {
> valid_referers none blocked *.cnprint.org server_names ~\.google\.
> ~\.baidu\. ~\.360\. ~\.bing\.;
Hello everyone,
My forum posts and attachments have been stolen much more by other site.
and I write a nginx rule to prevent, without success, please guide.
example this forum:
http://dysmyh.com/thread-41217-1-1.html
and my attachments url as
http://www.cnprint.org/bbs/attachment.php?attachmenti
Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Saturday 18 June 2016 14:12:31 B.R. wrote:
>> There is no downside on the server application I suppose, especially since,
>> as you recalled, nginx got no trouble for it.
>>
>> One big problem is, there might be socket exhaustion on the TCP stack of
>> your front-end
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 05:12:27PM -0400, Lebod wrote:
Hi there,
> I'm having an issue with our site. We're trying to redirect all traffic of
> http://example.com to https://www.example.com.
> Testing out our site, what happens is that http://example.com redirects to
> https://example.com which t
Lebod Wrote:
---
> nginx: [warn] conflicting server name "example.com" on 0.0.0.0:80,
It says it all.
> server {
> listen 80;
remove this line: > listen 443 ssl;
> server_name example.com ***IP Address***;
> return 301 https://ww
Hi everybody,
I'm having an issue with our site. We're trying to redirect all traffic of
http://example.com to https://www.example.com.
Testing out our site, what happens is that http://example.com redirects to
https://example.com which then redirects to https://www.example.com
We also get an err
Ah, I didn't know about NAT before. So that's how we have shared IP
addresses vs. dedicated IP addresses. This is beautiful; there's so
much to learn.
So the 2^16 limitation that B.R. mentioned is nothing to worry about.
It's like worrying that there are limited IP addresses available so we
can't
On Sunday 19 June 2016 16:06:56 Aahan Krish wrote:
> Hi Valentin,
>
> *(I repeat the same question I put to B.R. as you raised the same
> point.)*
>
> So you are referring to the 4-tuple (source_IP, source_port,
> server_IP, server_port) socket limitation, correct? I just came to
> know about thi
Hi Valentin,
*(I repeat the same question I put to B.R. as you raised the same
point.)*
So you are referring to the 4-tuple (source_IP, source_port,
server_IP, server_port) socket limitation, correct? I just came to
know about this and it's interesting. Please tell me if this
understanding of min
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:51:28AM +0200, Thomas Glanzmann wrote:
Hi there,
> I would like to send the header:
>
> add_header Strict-Transport-Security "max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains";
>
> Despite the 401 Unauthorized request. Is that possible?
http://nginx.org/r/add_header
That suggest
Hello,
I would like to send the header:
add_header Strict-Transport-Security "max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains";
Despite the 401 Unauthorized request. Is that possible?
Currently the header is only added after a successful authorization:
(x1) [~] curl -v https://tuvl.de
* Rebuilt URL to: htt
On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 11:29:49AM +0300, Andrey Novikov wrote:
Hi there,
> We've successfully configured interaction with two of these systems
> (all with mutual TLS), and when pointed another one to this server
> we've got next message in the error.log (log level for error log is
> set to debug
On Saturday 18 June 2016 14:12:31 B.R. wrote:
> There is no downside on the server application I suppose, especially since,
> as you recalled, nginx got no trouble for it.
>
> One big problem is, there might be socket exhaustion on the TCP stack of
> your front-end machine(s). Remember a socket is
Make sense...
Thanks
Posted at Nginx Forum:
https://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,267651,267692#msg-267692
___
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
19 matches
Mail list logo
