Issue with eTag not being honored on IIS 6.0

Hello,

I am having an issue with IIS 6.0 not honoring the MD_ETAG_CHANGENUMBER
metabase property. Per kb823544 it was a known issue that was supposed to be
fixed with Windows 2003 SP1 or via a hotfix for earlier verions . We are
running a web farm of Windows 2003 STD R2 SP2 servers and the reason I am
updating this value is so all servers in the farm will have the same change
number. Now since I am running Windows 2003 SP2 it should have been fixed. I
cant seem to find any more information regarding this issue. I am verifying
the etag using fiddler and the change number is still unique to the server
instead of the value I set in the metabase.xml file. Please help and thanks
in advance for any help.

Thanks.

Re: Issue with eTag not being honored on IIS 6.0

On Oct 26, 6:09 pm, Ky N wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am having an issue with IIS 6.0 not honoring the MD_ETAG_CHANGENUMBER
> metabase property. Per kb823544 it was a known issue that was supposed to be
> fixed with Windows 2003 SP1 or via a hotfix for earlier verions . We are
> running a web farm of Windows 2003 STD R2 SP2 servers and the reason I am
> updating this value is so all servers in the farm will have the same change
> number. Now since I am running Windows 2003 SP2 it should have been fixed. I
> cant seem to find any more information regarding this issue. I am verifying
> the etag using fiddler and the change number is still unique to the server
> instead of the value I set in the metabase.xml file. Please help and thanks
> in advance for any help.
>
> Thanks.


If you believe that the problem is with IIS6 in Windows Server 2003 R2
SP2, then I would contact Microsoft Product Support Services with a
support call. If there is a regression, then this will count as a bug
report and be free.

I highly recommend that you value your procedures and make sure to
cross all t's and dot all i's (it seems that you have) -- because if
you call PSS and it ends up being user misconfiguration, that may up
costing you some money to find out about your misconfiguration. It's a
bit of a catharsis, but hey, at least you get the issue resolved one
way or another. :-)


//David
http://w3-4u.blogspot.com
http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
//

Re: Issue with eTag not being honored on IIS 6.0

Thanks David for the response. I guess no one else wants to touch this one. I
did some more investigating and determined that on Windows 2003 servers
running IIS with .NET prohibited the etag change number reflects the value I
set in the metabase. On the other hand, on Windows 2003 servers running .NET
the updated value isnt honored. So I am leaning on the developers now to help
me sort this out.

"David Wang" wrote:

> On Oct 26, 6:09 pm, Ky N wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am having an issue with IIS 6.0 not honoring the MD_ETAG_CHANGENUMBER
> > metabase property. Per kb823544 it was a known issue that was supposed to be
> > fixed with Windows 2003 SP1 or via a hotfix for earlier verions . We are
> > running a web farm of Windows 2003 STD R2 SP2 servers and the reason I am
> > updating this value is so all servers in the farm will have the same change
> > number. Now since I am running Windows 2003 SP2 it should have been fixed. I
> > cant seem to find any more information regarding this issue. I am verifying
> > the etag using fiddler and the change number is still unique to the server
> > instead of the value I set in the metabase.xml file. Please help and thanks
> > in advance for any help.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
>
> If you believe that the problem is with IIS6 in Windows Server 2003 R2
> SP2, then I would contact Microsoft Product Support Services with a
> support call. If there is a regression, then this will count as a bug
> report and be free.
>
> I highly recommend that you value your procedures and make sure to
> cross all t's and dot all i's (it seems that you have) -- because if
> you call PSS and it ends up being user misconfiguration, that may up
> costing you some money to find out about your misconfiguration. It's a
> bit of a catharsis, but hey, at least you get the issue resolved one
> way or another. :-)
>
>
> //David
> http://w3-4u.blogspot.com
> http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
> //
>
>

Re: Issue with eTag not being honored on IIS 6.0

Yeah, the MD_ETAG_CHANGENUMBER only applies to static content served
by IIS since it's the IIS Static File Handler sending the ETag. Any
other handler of your content may generate ETag in its own way.


//David
http://w3-4u.blogspot.com
http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
//




On Oct 31, 12:31 pm, Ky N wrote:
> Thanks David for the response. I guess no one else wants to touch this one. I
> did some more investigating and determined that on Windows 2003 servers
> running IIS with .NET prohibited the etag change number reflects the value I
> set in the metabase. On the other hand, on Windows 2003 servers running .NET
> the updated value isnt honored. So I am leaning on the developers now to help
> me sort this out.
>
>
>
> "David Wang" wrote:
> > On Oct 26, 6:09 pm, Ky N wrote:
> > > Hello,
>
> > > I am having an issue with IIS 6.0 not honoring the MD_ETAG_CHANGENUMBER
> > > metabase property. Per kb823544 it was a known issue that was supposed to be
> > > fixed with Windows 2003 SP1 or via a hotfix for earlier verions . We are
> > > running a web farm of Windows 2003 STD R2 SP2 servers and the reason I am
> > > updating this value is so all servers in the farm will have the same change
> > > number. Now since I am running Windows 2003 SP2 it should have been fixed. I
> > > cant seem to find any more information regarding this issue. I am verifying
> > > the etag using fiddler and the change number is still unique to the server
> > > instead of the value I set in the metabase.xml file. Please help and thanks
> > > in advance for any help.
>
> > > Thanks.
>
> > If you believe that the problem is with IIS6 in Windows Server 2003 R2
> > SP2, then I would contact Microsoft Product Support Services with a
> > support call. If there is a regression, then this will count as a bug
> > report and be free.
>
> > I highly recommend that you value your procedures and make sure to
> > cross all t's and dot all i's (it seems that you have) -- because if
> > you call PSS and it ends up being user misconfiguration, that may up
> > costing you some money to find out about your misconfiguration. It's a
> > bit of a catharsis, but hey, at least you get the issue resolved one
> > way or another. :-)
>
> > //David
> >http://w3-4u.blogspot.com
> >http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
> > //- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -