[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#880195: apache2: Trying to use ws:// in proxy results in "No protocol handler was valid for the URL /ws .... "



Package: apache2
Version: 2.4.25-3+deb9u3
Severity: normal

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Dear Maintainer,

i'm trying to enable websocket proxy for customer on web server running Stretch.

After enabling module
# a2enmod proxy_wstunnel 
Considering dependency proxy for proxy_wstunnel:
Module proxy already enabled
Enabling module proxy_wstunnel.
To activate the new configuration, you need to run:
  systemctl restart apache2

and restarting apache, i try to use this snippet in vhost configuration
<IfModule mod_proxy_wstunnel.c>
        ProxyPass "/ws" "ws://127.0.0.1:9000/"
        ProxyPassReverse "/ws" "ws://127.0.0.1:9000/"
        ProxyPass "/wss" "ws://127.0.0.1:9000/"
        ProxyPassReverse "/wss" "ws://127.0.0.1:9000/"
</IfModule>

it ends with internal server error and log says
 AH01144: No protocol handler was valid for the URL /ws. If you are using a DSO version of mod_proxy, make sure the proxy submodules are included in the configuration using LoadModule.

Acording to
# apache2ctl -M | grep proxy
 proxy_module (shared)
 proxy_http_module (shared)
 proxy_wstunnel_module (shared)

all modules are loaded.

This apache runs MPM prefork+itk, I also tried on another host, running same version but with MPM event, to eliminate influence of itk (I know, it cannot be run with mod_http2 for example), with same result.

Don't know, what to test next

With regards,
Libor 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQJJBAEBCAAzFiEEPGZVVU37tFmB0TQv8O+MbsKfR44FAln3LiAVHGxpYm9yLmts
ZXBhY0BiY29tLmN6AAoJEPDvjG7Cn0eO8dYP/0yAJD0qdpJsxsgNA2XPsNRIJV0x
eNtppVBVkNH29Nvapa+Cq1RheU79rNJhcUHldOb1iNz0u06G0OzmAuRrDk9tR5b8
yoVtb2N8EDYuyFmr4Nw1MhMVBgNf1tNXIfmMBLF3Ol0DysvtpEQeZMDpm9bkStfg
oWbq/YLECDNy9xT0IH+Mt8VoD4EiPSHFjB46iZ0Lvjj/ftsG0rJMUayyzCZ/s4Us
lGy6JYuMtdF53wZuGGFZTt935TblhUfWTEOypeJ/Sm56Zucnd6TXQBGeqh5F1WKk
Sn9G6w4KSyZNLZb93gkDJVrRBbLZe7HV6IktmIB5egj0k5o5DgnbG+IEr5vqPbid
7ZbTZz4w5UGJ/y3RC1MDjrTz0wX6taw3TocBQJpq1Ov0VZ9UkSjq3lNgL+oSwV0m
yWChI2ZNOrx8FTdQJXL7Ok7Yw4e6fYySgcyl7ahg+RUEZqDAvU5xxvVP74cFYWxB
uIzXZtKLBKI5X0HIDAXJ+pYmkCIxuHfBxKFKP2PE/CMw2C0UI+RM838t07tyUfnE
gV2e9KIG/WOTvGsUiRnmSN6020sE5MzyUSXmLmIeTkZoFpI5E3DXfkijN1nau4kA
2b3NymnfvqXx/eSd2Iu2zAQAApR7PoNmLwPaZYlYryY7hQqNk45YscQKnq91xM45
MLYYponhG9jT/W1p
=GrvM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: