Hi Mikkel,

I went ahead and implemented the proposed workaround. Now the AWS
authorization header is computed with an "application/x-www-form-urlencoded"
content-type header value when:
 - no content found
 - method is not PUT
 - Java version starts with "1.4" or "1.5"

As I haven't tested it directly against Amazon S3, could you let me know if
it works?
http://www.restlet.org/downloads/current.zip 

Best regards,
Jerome Louvel

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Jerome Louvel 
> Envoyé : samedi 28 octobre 2006 12:09
> À : discuss@restlet.tigris.org
> Objet : RE: Adding standard headers
> 
> 
> Hi Mikkel,
> 
> As you said, the problem lies in a JDK bug (details at: 
> http://www.restlet.org/faq#18). One workaround is to use JDK 
> 6 beta 2 if possible.
> 
> Otherwise, I don't know how to workaround the bug. Setting 
> the content type to "" may solve the issue? Could you try? 
> Otherwise, we always have the possibility to consider the 
> content type to be "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" when 
> signing for AWS...
> 
> Best regards,
> Jerome  
> 
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Mikkel Jensen
> > Envoyé : vendredi 27 octobre 2006 19:44
> > À : discuss@restlet.tigris.org
> > Objet : Re: Adding standard headers
> > 
> > Hi Jerome, 
> > 
> > Just tried implementing the AWS challenge scheme as you 
> > suggested and it works 
> > great! 
> > 
> > The only problem I seem to have is with 'empty' requests: 
> > When there is no entity representation in the request the 
> > Content-type is set 
> > to a default value of 'application/x-www-form-urlencoded' for 
> > all request 
> > methods except 'PUT' - in which case the header is left out!!! 
> > 
> > I'm aware that the problem lies with the HttpURLConnection 
> > class. But, if you 
> > have any suggestions for a way to remove (or explicitly set) 
> > the content-type 
> > I would very much like to hear it! 
> > 
> > So far the rule stated above seems to hold up so I am able to 
> > construct the AWS 
> > credential correctly. It just seems like bad programming 
> > style to have to 
> > depend on some fairly undocumented default value. 
> > 
> > - Mikkel 
> > 
> > 
> > 

Reply via email to