Yes On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I changed the Filter to get teh event go through the whole filter > chain : > > // Inform that the session is not any more secured > session.getFilterChain().fireEvent(SslEvent.UNSECURED); > > So now, every filters that implement the event(FilterEvent) method will > be able to see the propagated event. > > That's probably what you suggested, Jonathan. > > > Le 14/04/2018 à 04:21, Emmanuel Lecharny a écrit : > > I get your point. > > > > It's possible to add a logger filter more than once in the chain, > assuming > > the name is not the same. I would argue that for any event to start at > the > > Head in order for it to traverse all the filter is a bit spurious: such > > event is likely not to be process by any filter. > > > > I'll see if adding a fireEvent() method in the head filter is not more > > 'consistent' with what we currently have for other events, and rename > > 'fire' to 'event'. > > > > Thanks ! > > > > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Sent to the dev list, where it belongs... > >> > >> > >> -------- Message transféré -------- > >> Subject: Re: Adding a secured() event in the IoHandler > >> To: Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com> > >> > >> If nextFilter.fire is called within messageReceived then it will send > the > >> event to SSL Filter + 1; if nextFilter.fire is called within messageSent > >> then it will send the event to SSL Filter -1; Forcing it to start at > the > >> head would make it more uniform and allow for debugging filter to be > ahead > >> of the SSL Filter. Not really a big deal. > >> > >> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 10:52 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny < > elecha...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> Le 13/04/2018 à 16:32, Jonathan Valliere a écrit : > >>>> Couple of comments: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 1. Any specific reason why you chose “fire” for the base name of > the > >>>> handler function instead of something like “event” ? > >>> > >>> No. It could be named event if it makes more sense. > >>> > >>> > >>>> 2. Instead of calling nextFilter.fire; you might want to call > >>>> session.getFilterChain().fire() or > >>>> session.getFilterChain().getEntry(this).fire() force correct > >> downward > >>>> behavior regardless of current processing direction. > >>> > >>> I don't think it makes any sense to propagate an event back to the > head. > >>> The only place processing events is the IoHandler, which is the next > >>> after the tail. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Emmanuel Lecharny > >>> > >>> Symas.com > >>> directory.apache.org > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Emmanuel Lecharny > > Symas.com > directory.apache.org > >
