https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53098

--- Comment #14 from [email protected] <[email protected]> ---
I suspect everyone is in agreement that the transport needs to be protected for
this to be useful. But lets not get the cart before the horse, protected
transport only becomes an issue *after* this omission in the AJP protocol
generation is fixed. That's all this bug report is asking for, to correct the
omission. The patch is available, it's not hard. Nobody would be forced to use
the feature so it doesn't make anything less secure. But as it stands now if
you do want to use it, perhaps you have a protected transport available to you,
you can't use it because the AJP protocol generator oddly omits the attribute.

We want to use the attribute. We'll worry about the separate issue of protected
transport elsewhere. Make sense?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to