+<sect3 renderas="sect4" id="max-client-connections"><title>max-client-connections</title>
+<variablelist>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Specifies:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ Maximum number of client connections that will be served.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Type of value:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ <replaceable>Positive number.</replaceable>
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Default value:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>None</para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Effect if unset:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ Connections are served until a resource limit is reached.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Notes:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ &my-app; creates one thread (or process) for every incoming client
+ connection that isn't rejected based on the access control settings.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ If the system is powerful enough, &my-app; can theoretically deal with
+ several hundred (or thousand) connections at the same time, but some
+ operating systems enforce resource limits by shutting down offending
+ processes and their default limits may be below the ones &my-app; would
+ require under heavy load.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Configuring &my-app; to enforce a connection limit below the thread
+ or process limit used by the operating system makes sure this doesn't
+ happen. Simply increasing the operating system's limit would work too,
+ but if &my-app; isn't the only application running on the system,
+ you may actually want to limit the resources used by &my-app;.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ If &my-app; is only used by a single trusted user, limiting the
+ number of client connections is probably unnecessary. If there
+ are multiple possibly untrusted users you probably still want to
+ additionally use a packet filter to limit the maximal number of
+ incoming connections per client. Otherwise a malicious user could
+ intentionally create a high number of connections to prevent other
+ users from using &my-app;.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Obviously using this option only makes sense if you choose a limit
+ below the one enforced by the operating system.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Examples:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ max-client-connections 256
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+</variablelist>
+<![%config-file;[<literallayout>@@#max-client-connections 256</literallayout>]]>
+</sect3>
+
+
+<sect3 renderas="sect4" id="handle-as-empty-doc-returns-ok"><title>handle-as-empty-doc-returns-ok</title>
+<variablelist>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Specifies:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ The status code Privoxy returns for pages blocked with
+ <!-- URL will only end up in the user manual so the relative link should work. -->
+ <literal><ulink url="actions-file.html#HANDLE-AS-EMPTY-DOCUMENT">+handle-as-empty-document</ulink></literal>.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Type of value:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ <replaceable>0 or 1</replaceable>
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Default value:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>0</para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Effect if unset:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ Privoxy returns a status 403(forbidden) for all blocked pages.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Effect if set:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ Privoxy returns a status 200(OK) for pages blocked with +handle-as-empty-document
+ and a status 403(Forbidden) for all other blocked pages.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>Notes:</term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ This is a work-around for Firefox bug 492459:
+ <quote>
+ Websites are no longer rendered if SSL requests for JavaScripts are blocked by a proxy.
+ </quote>
+ (<ulink url="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=492459"
+ >https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=492459</ulink>)
+ As the bug has been fixed for quite some time this option should no longer
+ be needed and will be removed in a future release. Please speak up if you
+ have a reason why the option should be kept around.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+</variablelist>
+<![%config-file;[<literallayout>@@#handle-as-empty-doc-returns-ok 1</literallayout>]]>
+</sect3>
+
+