Skip to Content
Yes, I know that this is a little too late.  But, I guess I have to vent here a bit because I still have never received a good answer.  Why was there never a replacement for IIS Proxy?  I know the lines that I will be getting.  Use Apache.  Well why should I?  IIS Proxy was just thrilled to sit on my IIS web servers and work just fine.  As for support, SAP does not give support for Apache, so why should I switch?  OK, use SAPNego / Kerberos, it’s safe and secure.  I can’t.  Why?  Because Kerberos does not work over the internet.  So what are the real alternatives for external customers to come into your Portal?  Certificates?  Then I would have to make my customers wait while I verify them and generate a certificated and send it to them?  We can’t make customers wait, they will go somewhere else.  My opinion is that IISProxy should not have taken away from us without a proper replacement.  I know that I am not the only one that is still using it, and I still get e-mails from other Portal admins that need help with it.  Would it been that hard to give us a replacement or updated version?  The only bug that I knew of was that it was not 100% HTTP 1.1 compliant.  The sudden EOL of this put a lot of people in a bind I am sure.  Well, this is my two cents.
To report this post you need to login first.


You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. Former Member
    We are still using the proxy in an unsupported mode while evaluating a move to Apache.  On a side note, what specifically in Http 1.1 was not working?  Is there a SAP Note # or link you can provide.  I’m curious.


  2. Former Member Post author
    IISPoxy 1.6.2 would throw http 1.1 417 errors.

    The 417 error is an expectation failure. The client is sending the PUT statement to load the file but it is erroring out. “failed to read continuation header” The client is sending the file and over the header of the file is a condition that can not be met by IISProxy.

    From RFC 2616:
    Requirements for HTTP/1.1 proxies:

    – If a proxy receives a request that includes an Expect request header field with the “100-continue” expectation, and the proxy either knows that the next-hop server complies with HTTP/1.1 or higher, or does not know the HTTP version of the next-hop server, it MUST forward the request, including the Expect header field.

    – If the proxy knows that the version of the next-hop server is HTTP/1.0 or lower, it MUST NOT forward the request, and it MUST respond with a 417 (Expectation Failed) status.

    This is the condition of how a 417 error is returned. IISProxy might be assuming WAS is using HTTP 1.0. According to the RFC, if the Proxy knows it is HTTP 1.1+ or if it DOES NOT KNOW it must pass the request.

    The solution was to downgrade to 1.6.1.

    Other than that, I have had little problems with it.  Let me know how your Apache works out please.

    1. Former Member
      Hi David,

      I am having more or less the same problem as you have stated above. I cannot find IISProxy 1.6.1.
      to down grade to. Where did yu get a copy of it.


  3. Former Member
    Hi Guys , i’m glad to here about the IISProxy but my client wants me to go with it. i would like to know where i can download IISProxy ,can’t find it anywhere

      please thks a lot

  4. Former Member
    Hello, david,

    Thanks for your blog, I also think IISproxy is suit for us to test with simple implementation.

    But I can’t download from SAP any more, just now, I send a mail to you, could you please send me the IISProxy 1.6.1 package?



Leave a Reply