On 3/15/07, Igor Sysoev <is-G...@public.gmane.org> wrote:
The correct name should be "limit_methods_except". For example
limit_methods_except GET {
allow ...
deny all;
}
All methods expect GET/HEAD are allowed to the specified hosts.
Thanks, I see. Are you willing to accept suggestions for syntax
improvement? I ask because I've been working on documentation for
nginx and, being a bit of a fanatic about clarity and simplicity, I
have some ideas in that area. And well-chosen names can make a huge
difference - like between instant recognition and an hour's worth of
experimenting to find out what is really meant.
"limit_except" is a good example of a bad name. To be honest, I
consider it an excellent candidate for the Atrocious Name Hall of
Fame. We can blame Apache. ;) I can think of 50 different ways to
express it better. I agree with you that "method" should probably be
in the name. But there are other ways, too. I would get rid of
"limit", for example; that's not the real meaning. In fact, in my
opinion it's quite misleading; since I think of limits as having to do
with bounds on something that wants to grow, I waste time thinking in
the wrong direction when trying to understand it. But "limit_except"
is just about authorization. One possibility is an authorization
block:
authorization { // spelled out to avoid confusion with "authority"
in e.g. a uri
http-methods { //default: apply to all methods; spelled out to
avoid name collisions
...
exempt FOO BAR; // these are exempted from the rule
}
other-auth-directives...
}
Thanks,
gregg
11 messages in ru.sysoev.nginxRe: doc: limit_except
