Re: bug #42120: Apache improperly handling Path Component parameters?

2007-04-16 Thread Andy Wang
Nick Kew wrote: On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:30:06 -0500 Andy Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are a number of potential workarounds (LocationMatch, or Multiple Location blocks to deal with the ;* pattern) but it does seem like this is a bug unless someone can clarify RFC 2396 section 3.3 for

Re: bug #42120: Apache improperly handling Path Component parameters?

2007-04-14 Thread Jess Holle
Nick Kew wrote: On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:30:06 -0500 Andy Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are a number of potential workarounds (LocationMatch, or Multiple Location blocks to deal with the ;* pattern) but it does seem like this is a bug unless someone can clarify RFC 2396 section 3.3 for

Re: bug #42120: Apache improperly handling Path Component parameters?

2007-04-13 Thread Nick Kew
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:30:06 -0500 Andy Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are a number of potential workarounds (LocationMatch, or > Multiple Location blocks to deal with the ;* pattern) but it does > seem like this is a bug unless someone can clarify RFC 2396 section > 3.3 for me and explai

bug #42120: Apache improperly handling Path Component parameters?

2007-04-13 Thread Andy Wang
I just submitted bug 42120. It appears that Apache is improperly (at least I think it's improper) matching Location blocks when doing authentication if a path component parameter is passed on. Specifically, something like this {Auth stuff} In this scenario, if I hit http://server/webapp/se