DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34909>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34909





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-05-16 16:31 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
Oleg,
I think this may be the same problem in the HTTP Client 3.0 code. I overlooked
this before, but I checked the 'response' strings in the logs I posted for both
the 2.0.2 and 3.0 client and they do NOT match--just like in your initial test
case where different responses were generated. I tried the patch too, just in
case--no luck though. I seem to remember when I was stepping through the code
for the 3.0 client that the cnonce value (which I believe is seeded with the
system time), is hashed into the final 'response' value---I do not know if the
2.0.2 code does this, but it may be why the 3.0 code is producing a different
response.

> Jeff,
> I was wrong in my initial assumption, because my test case was flawed. The
> invalid auth response generated by HttpClient 3.0 was due to a deprecated
> constructor I used in my test cases. 
> 
> So, this does not look good. I may need a set of valid credentials for the 
> site
> in order to proceed.
> 
> Oleg



-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to