On 02/12/2014 15:07, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2014-12-02 15:47 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :
>
>> I think there might a solution that works for everybody (thanks
>> Konstantin). What about setting an origin header value of "null" in the
>> client if none is set by the user? That is consistent with all th
2014-12-02 15:47 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :
> I think there might a solution that works for everybody (thanks
> Konstantin). What about setting an origin header value of "null" in the
> client if none is set by the user? That is consistent with all the
> specifications and is arguably better than doi
On 02/12/2014 09:24, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2014-12-02 10:12 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :My opinion is
> that the default value currently being provided is just
>
>> plain wrong. The origin is meant to be "the script origin generating the
>> WebSocket connection request" not the scheme, host and port
2014-12-02 12:12 GMT+03:00 Mark Thomas :
> On 02/12/2014 09:01, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
>> 2014-12-02 9:46 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :
>>
>>> Assuming that this is coming from testing with the TCK, I'd like to see
>>> the results of challenging the affected tests (ideally with the
>>> discussion on the E
2014-12-02 10:12 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :My opinion is
that the default value currently being provided is just
> plain wrong. The origin is meant to be "the script origin generating the
> WebSocket connection request" not the scheme, host and port of the
> WebSocket connection currently being made.
On 02/12/2014 09:01, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2014-12-02 9:46 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :
>
>> Assuming that this is coming from testing with the TCK, I'd like to see
>> the results of challenging the affected tests (ideally with the
>> discussion on the EG as a result of that challenge) before making
2014-12-02 9:46 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :
> Assuming that this is coming from testing with the TCK, I'd like to see
> the results of challenging the affected tests (ideally with the
> discussion on the EG as a result of that challenge) before making any
> final decision on what the behaviour should
On 01/12/2014 21:52, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2014-12-01 22:00 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :
>
>> This is an improvement since it is not just the scheme, host and port
>> but it still reflects the connection being made to WebSocket rather than
>> the Origin of the request. I don't see how the WebSocketCo
2014-12-01 22:00 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas :
> This is an improvement since it is not just the scheme, host and port
> but it still reflects the connection being made to WebSocket rather than
> the Origin of the request. I don't see how the WebSocketContainer can
> possibly determine what the origin i
On 01/12/2014 17:55, r...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: remm
> Date: Mon Dec 1 17:55:07 2014
> New Revision: 1642721
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1642721
> Log:
> Try a better origin header.
This is an improvement since it is not just the scheme, host and port
but it still reflects the connecti
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:55 PM, wrote:
> Author: remm
> Date: Mon Dec 1 17:55:07 2014
> New Revision: 1642721
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1642721
> Log:
> Try a better origin header.
>
> Modified:
> tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsWebSocketContainer.java
>
> Modified
Author: remm
Date: Mon Dec 1 17:55:07 2014
New Revision: 1642721
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1642721
Log:
Try a better origin header.
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsWebSocketContainer.java
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsWebSocketContain
12 matches
Mail list logo
