DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34818] New: - Request alternating color scheme for html manager
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=34818. 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=34818 Summary: Request alternating color scheme for html manager Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.9 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Webapps:Manager AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] When undeploying applications, it is easy to accidently click on the wrong button, thus unloading the wrong application (causes stress when multiple people are using the system at the same time). Propose to add alternating background color to the table. patches and example: http://review.gis.msu.edu/patches/ Thanks -Jeff Domeyer Geographic Information System Michigan State University -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34723] New: - IIS JK can't handle request under heavy load
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=34723. 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=34723 Summary: IIS JK can't handle request under heavy load Product: Tomcat 5 Version: Unknown Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Native:JK AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using isapi_redirect.dll under IIS, I found that HTTP request is not handled (looks like hang). My enviroment is : * Web server - Windows 2000 SP4 - IIS 5.0 - isapi_redirect.dll (1.2.8 or above) * Servlet - Fedora core 3 - Tomcat 5.0.28 I used the Microsoft Stress Tool with these settings: -- GET /servlet-examples/servlet/RequestInfoExample (delay 10) Concurrent Connection : 30 Test Run time : 1 min. --- When I run the MS Stress tool, the first 10 ~ 30 requests are handled. (verified by tomcat's access log) but all the remaing requests are not processed and the result codes are all '403 forbidden'. When I use web browser, the IIS shows '403 too many connection' or something like that. I'll attach the test result of MS stress tool. Using isapi_redirect 1.2.6, I get the better result (few 403 error ratio about 1/10). -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34723] - IIS JK can't handle request under heavy load
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=34723. 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=34723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 12:35 --- Created an attachment (id=14917) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14917action=view) The test result of MS stress tool The test result of MS stress tool for IIS-Tomcat using isapi_redirect.dll v1.2.11 -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34723] - IIS JK can't handle request under heavy load
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=34723. 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=34723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 12:56 --- These are additional test results for isapi_redirect.dll v.1.2.8 or above. MS Stress Tool Setting -- Result -- no delay / 30 client -- only first 10~30 request are handled and hang. delay 10ms / 30 client -- results are fine. (fewer 403) delay = 10ms / 30 client -- results are fine. (fewer 403) My PCs are : Windows (IIS) : P4 2.4, 1.5G RAM Linux (Tomcat) : P4 1.8, 1G RAM I think that isapi_redirect.dll can't handle heavy load during short delay. But using 1.2.6, the hang does not occur. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34723] - IIS JK can't handle request under heavy load
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=34723. 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=34723 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 14:36 --- This is not a bug. For those kind of questions, you should first try tomcat-user list. For high load you will need to set the 'cachesize', because for IIS the default value is 10, because this is the limit on workstation version of windows. Since you are using server version adjust to you needs, like 30 or more. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34349] - cookies=false with request mit session cookie
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=34349. 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=34349 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 16:10 --- Dietmar, please use the tomcat-user and tomcat-dev mailing lists to solicit clarification, rather than reopening Bugzilla issues. Thank you. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34723] - IIS JK can't handle request under heavy load
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=34723. 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=34723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 16:16 --- Hi Mladen Turk, Thanks for your comments. It's great help. I'll try first the tomcat-user list. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34669] New: - Cookies are not always parsed on simultaneous request
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=34669. 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=34669 Summary: Cookies are not always parsed on simultaneous request Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.0.28 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I find that despite there being an incoming JSESSIONID cookie, sometimes this doesn't make it into the requests Cookies. I've confirmed this by trapping the case in my servlet filter, and then examining the request. In this case I can see the cookie header, but the cookies are empty. Some specifics - I'm using JBoss 4.0.1sp1, which has Tomcat 5.0 embedded. The use of the session is in a servlet filter for security. I store a JAAS subject on the session in my login form, and I test the existence in the filter. The pages generated by the application then make many other requests. IE correctly sends the cookie in the requests, but sometimes, perhaps one in five or one in ten requests, the cookie is ignored as stated in the first paragraph. I access the sessions using synchronized blocks to avoid multiple simul updates. I tried adding a sync on the doFilter method on the off chance that there was a session issue (although, as noted above, the issue appears to be due to the cookies). -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34669] - Cookies are not always parsed on simultaneous request
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=34669. 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=34669 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-28 18:07 --- I am sorry, but I simply do not believe you. Objects used for reading and parsing the requests are per thread, and as a result are fully independent (this includes headers and cookies). If you believe there's an issue, you'll have to investigate it yourself, and submit a fix (or at least find out what goes wrong inside the Tomcat code, and where). -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34669] - Cookies are not always parsed on simultaneous request
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=34669. 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=34669 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-28 18:22 --- I will do more investigation. But I don't believe you isn't a particularly reasonable response. It may be the fault is outside of Tomcat, but it really is hard to argue with what I saw in the debugger. If I had a dollar for every time I thought that, and later found the problem I could probably retire. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34669] - Cookies are not always parsed on simultaneous request
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=34669. 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=34669 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-28 20:00 --- OK, I've done more investigation. I believe what's happening is that the unprocessed flag in the cookies object is getting set to false before the headers are all available. Here's why: I put a breakpoint in my servlet filter just before I get the session. I ask for the cookies and I break if cookies returns null. Then I go into the data structure and look at the CoyoteRequest object. The Cookies object has unprocessed=false and no cookies, but the headers include a cookie header. I reset unprocessed to true, then I reaccess Cookies and the JSESSIONID cookie appears. More data: I put a breakpoint in the cookie parser and it never failed to find the header. So what I'm wondering is if there is a case where parsing might be bypassed? For example, it looks like the cookies are normally processed on object creation and then if recycle is called. Could the headers sometimes be getting set without calling recycle? The other bug I'm seeing is that sometimes the scheme isn't set on the request. request.getScheme returns null (which breaks redirect). -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34669] - Cookies are not always parsed on simultaneous request
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=34669. 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=34669 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-28 20:13 --- This does not make any sense at all, especially: (In reply to comment #3) unprocessed flag in the cookies object is getting set to false before the headers are all available The first thing which occurs is parsing the headers. If cookie parsing is done before, then you are looking at improper access to the container objects. Try to enable the security manager to get some NPEs to reveal them. I don't know where your problem is, but all I know is that it is not in Tomcat. Please do not reopen the report. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 15872] - ContextManager: Error reading request, ignored - java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
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=15872. 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=15872 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://210.80.148.118/iscore ||/index.cfm?db=22sport=foid ||= Severity|blocker |critical Status|NEW |RESOLVED OS/Version|Linux |OS/2 Platform|Other |PC Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-28 03:31 --- Error recived is using https://httpbridge.kgbinternet.com/bridge/ is: HTTP Status 500 - error happened during connecting: java.net.UnknownHostException: http type Status report message error happened during connecting: java.net.UnknownHostException: http description The server encountered an internal error (error happened during connecting: java.net.UnknownHostException: http) that prevented it from fulfilling this request. Apache Tomcat/4.1.27 -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34471] - Java-Request-Attribut java.security.cert.X509Certificate = null
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=34471. 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=34471 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-17 20:12 --- Plenty of posts to the tomcat-user list indicate that this works. It looks, therefore, very much like a configuration problem and is therefore a question for the tomcat-user list. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34471] New: - Java-Request-Attribut java.security.cert.X509Certificate = null
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=34471.
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=34471
Summary: Java-Request-Attribut
java.security.cert.X509Certificate = null
Product: Tomcat 4
Version: 4.1.27
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: Connector:JK/AJP
AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apache2.0.48-128 with modjk and Tomcat 4.1.27-37
Java-Request-Attribut java.security.cert.X509Certificate returns null
%
java.security.Principal principal = request.getUserPrincipal();
if (principal == null) {
out.println(request.getUserPrincipal() == null);
} else {
out.println(principal.getName() = + principal.getName());
}
%
Plattform: IBM PowerPC
OS: SLES9
JDK: IBM 1.4.2
--
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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22013] - RequestDispatcher.forward doesn't work with a relative path on a forwarded request
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=22013. 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=22013 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-10 20:23 --- This is now fixed in TC4. It was fixed in TC5 some time ago (in 5.0.7). Many thanks for the patch. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34349] - cookies=false with request mit session cookie
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=34349. 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=34349 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-08 08:12 --- Sorry Remy for the reopen, but I think this is not well defined! What happend, when the cookie contain an old or an invalid sessionid? When I send a request with a cookie like: Set-Cookie: JSESSIONID=1234567890 then urlRewrite don't rewrite, because we work with cookies. An other valid session cookie can't set because in context cookies = false ??? regards Dietmar -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34349] New: - cookies=false with request mit session cookie
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=34349. 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=34349 Summary: cookies=false with request mit session cookie Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.7 Platform: All OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I set in my context.xml cookies=false and send a request with a cookie jsessionid and urlEncode don't encode my links! the testcode looks like URL url = new URL (http://myServer/foo/foo;); HttpURLConnection conn = (HttpURLConnection)url.openConnection(); conn.setUseCaches(false); conn.setRequestProperty(Cookie,JSESSIONID=foo); regards Dietmar -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34349] - cookies=false with request mit session cookie
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=34349. 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=34349 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-07 17:08 --- If a cookie is submitted, Tomcat will use it. Please don't reopen the report. -- 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]
web application request count and error count in tomcat manager servlet (tomcat mbeans..)
hi, had a question about web application request count and error count from the tomcat manager servlet (which are also available via tomcat mbeans). initially, i was thinking that request count translates to total number of requests. and success count could be dervied by subtracting error count from request count. however, this doesn't always seem to be the case. it seems to be dependent on how the web application is configured via it's web.xml file. for instance: if i improperly access my web application by providing a bad url (eg http://127.0.0.1:8080/webapp/some_junk), both request count and error count increment by one as expected. however, if i configure my web app to always prompt for authentication and access it w/a bad url: after giving the correct username/password, error count is incremented correctly cause of the bad url, but request count is NOT. not sure if this is a tomcat mbean bug or by design..?? does anyone know the exact definition of request count? is it suppose to be total number of requests? thanks in advance! -annie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mod_jk 1.2.10 lb worker method Request|Trace not being configured
I tried setting the lb worker method=T (Traffic) and found that it was not being honored. A review of the code found that the jk_lb_get_method() function is never being called to set the lb worker-lbmethod. Is this feature just not enabled yet? Regards, Glenn -- Glenn Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | /* Spelin donut madder| MOREnet System Programming | * if iz ina coment. | Missouri Research and Education Network | */ | -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34207] New: - Request username and password when http://localhost:8080
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=34207. 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=34207 Summary: Request username and password when http://localhost:8080 Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.7 Platform: PC URL: http://localhost:8080 OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: critical Priority: P1 Component: Unknown AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, I have installed Tomcat v5.5.7 (previously I installed v5.5.9). I have started Tomcat. I have entered http://localhost:8080 and a dialog window appears, requesting the user name and the password. I have entered the administration user of Tomcat (admin), and my system username, and the administration system username. But, I can't access to the main page of Tomcat. After this, I have stopped every service of my computer (antivirus, Oracle, MySQL...) and I have delete every resident program. And the result is the same. I have verified my proxy. It's OK. I can navigate, reveive and send emails, do telnets, ftps, and so. I have JOnAS installed previously, attacking 9000 port. But this application server isn't running on my system. There is a track: On my MS Internet Explorer v6.0 browser, the dialog window is diferent to my FireFox v1.0.1 browser. The title is Connecting to localhost, and the message is XDB. In the bottom appears an image with two keys over blue background. In the Firefox, the title is Request, no message appears, and a new option check appears, with this message: Use the administrator manager for remember the password. I don't know what is the problem. Please, help me. Thank you very much. Yrgola -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 34207] - Request username and password when http://localhost:8080
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=34207. 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=34207 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-28 16:01 --- Please use the tomcat-user list to debug. Bugzilla is a not a help desk. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-16 22:18 --- No further response so closing as invalid. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-16 23:19 --- Very similar to bug 33916. But, I've seen this *exact* stack trace, which wasn't reproduceable but just happened once in a while when IE was the web client. I looked into it and concluded that it was a bug in Commons FileUpload, which is included with Struts in this case, and that it is likely fixed in newer versions (probably a newer version than we're using). Which version of Struts are you using? I'd guess Struts 1.1, and I'll bet that a new version of Struts integrates a new version of Commons FileUpload that doesn't have the bug. See bug 21269. I believe that's the one that fixes it, although I haven't confirmed that it is indeed fixed that way. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33916] - Multipart request errors occuring after upgrading to 5.5.7
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=33916. 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=33916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-15 14:11 --- No response - invalid. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33916] - Multipart request errors occuring after upgrading to 5.5.7
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=33916. 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=33916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-15 23:31 --- Just an FYI on this: I've seen a similar stack trace, which wasn't reproduceable but just happened once in a while when IE was the web client. I looked into it and concluded that it was a bug in Commons FileUpload, and that it is likely fixed in newer versions (probably a newer version than we're using). See bug 21269. I believe that's the one, although I haven't confirmed that it is indeed fixed that way. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33911] New: - Request for security role mapping (role-to-group/user)
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=33911. 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=33911 Summary: Request for security role mapping (role-to-group/user) Product: Tomcat 5 Version: Unknown Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] It would be nice if Tomcat had a way to map J2EE security-role's to one or more groups, users, etc. This is a feature offered by many app servers like WebLogic, Oracle 9iAS and SunONE. This would make it easier for several apps with unique roles to share the same set of groups. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33916] New: - Multipart request errors occuring after upgrading to 5.5.7
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=33916. 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=33916 Summary: Multipart request errors occuring after upgrading to 5.5.7 Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.7 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows 2000 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Unknown AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have an upload page that has been working without any problems for months. It is used dozens of times each day. My web app uses Struts. Today, I installed Java 5 and upgraded from Tomcat 5.0.16 to 5.5.7. I deployed to same code as before and started getting a multipart request error (see below). It does not occur consistently. So far today, it has occurred twice. Error from logs... INFO http--Processor24 org.apache.struts.action.RequestProcessor - Processing a 'POST' for path '/viewBidDetailsAction' ERROR http--Processor25 org.apache.struts.upload.CommonsMultipartRequestHandler - Failed to parse multipart request org.apache.commons.fileupload.FileUploadException: Processing of multipart/form-data request failed. Read timed out at org.apache.commons.fileupload.FileUpload.parseRequest (FileUpload.java:462) at org.apache.commons.fileupload.FileUpload.parseRequest (FileUpload.java:304) at org.apache.struts.upload.CommonsMultipartRequestHandler.handleRequest (CommonsMultipartRequestHandler.java:234) at org.apache.struts.util.RequestUtils.populate(RequestUtils.java:934) at org.apache.struts.action.RequestProcessor.processPopulate (RequestProcessor.java:779) at org.apache.struts.action.RequestProcessor.process (RequestProcessor.java:246) at org.apache.struts.action.ActionServlet.process (ActionServlet.java:1292) at org.apache.struts.action.ActionServlet.doPost(ActionServlet.java:510) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:709) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:802) at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter (ApplicationFilterChain.java:252) at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter (ApplicationFilterChain.java:173) at com.dex.goldmine.actions.SessionTimeoutFilter.doFilter(Unknown Source) at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter (ApplicationFilterChain.java:202) at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter (ApplicationFilterChain.java:173) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke (StandardWrapperValve.java:214) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke (StandardContextValve.java:178) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke (StandardHostValve.java:126) at org.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke (ErrorReportValve.java:105) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke (StandardEngineValve.java:107) at org.apache.catalina.connector.CoyoteAdapter.service (CoyoteAdapter.java:148) at org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Processor.process (Http11Processor.java:825) at org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Protocol$Http11ConnectionHandler.processConnectio n(Http11Protocol.java:738) at org.apache.tomcat.util.net.PoolTcpEndpoint.processSocket (PoolTcpEndpoint.java:526) at org.apache.tomcat.util.net.LeaderFollowerWorkerThread.runIt (LeaderFollowerWorkerThread.java:80) at org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool$ControlRunnable.run (ThreadPool.java:684) at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) ERROR http--Processor25 StandardWrapper[/goldmine2:action] - Servlet.service () for servlet action threw exception javax.servlet.ServletException: Filter exception : Processing of multipart/form-data request failed. Read timed out at com.dex.goldmine.actions.SessionTimeoutFilter.doFilter(Unknown Source) at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.internalDoFilter (ApplicationFilterChain.java:202) at org.apache.catalina.core.ApplicationFilterChain.doFilter (ApplicationFilterChain.java:173) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapperValve.invoke (StandardWrapperValve.java:214) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContextValve.invoke (StandardContextValve.java:178) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostValve.invoke (StandardHostValve.java:126) at org.apache.catalina.valves.ErrorReportValve.invoke (ErrorReportValve.java:105) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngineValve.invoke (StandardEngineValve.java:107
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33916] - Multipart request errors occuring after upgrading to 5.5.7
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=33916. 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=33916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-08 23:45 --- As you may understand, you need to file reports that we have a chance to reproduce. I cannot debug this, so I recommend you investigate more (or use the release which was working for you instead). -- 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]
request for tomcat-dev list admins
Could you remove these two accounts who send back to me (and probably others), any post to tomcat-dev ? [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33558] - When the master node is enter again, only the first request is not replicated.
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=33558. 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=33558 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-03 15:28 --- I have applied the fix, thanks for bringing this to my attention. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33728] New: - Bad request url with Struts/Tiles
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=33728. 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=33728 Summary: Bad request url with Struts/Tiles Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.7 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows 2000 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I develop with Struts 1.2.4 and Tiles Struts action /Main.do maps to Tiles definition main.page Tiles main.page definition points on some jsp file: /jsp/Main.jsp In /jsp/Main.jsp, I'm displaying a link doing some table paging. Link is contructed from resquest's URI. Using Tomcat 5.0.28, link points on /Main.do and that's fine. Using Tomcat 5.5.7, link points on /jsp/Main.jsp which is a failure. This bug may affect other Tomcat 5.5.7 / Struts / Tiles projects. Best regards. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33728] - Bad request url with Struts/Tiles
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=33728. 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=33728 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-24 15:18 --- Please submit a ready to use war test case. -- 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]
Re: CVS commit request - jakarta-tomcat-connectors
Jim Jagielski wrote: I'd like to request commit privs for the jakarta-tomcat-connectors tree. I will be working mostly on the apache/mod_jk integration aspects to complement what is going on in the httpd mod_proxy side. Great ;-)) you need to be in the jakarta group. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CVS commit request - jakarta-tomcat-connectors
jean-frederic clere wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: I'd like to request commit privs for the jakarta-tomcat-connectors tree. I will be working mostly on the apache/mod_jk integration aspects to complement what is going on in the httpd mod_proxy side. Great ;-)) you need to be in the jakarta group. I wanted to ping tomcat-dev 1st to see if there would be any issues, etc... first ;) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CVS commit request - jakarta-tomcat-connectors
I'd like to request commit privs for the jakarta-tomcat-connectors tree. I will be working mostly on the apache/mod_jk integration aspects to complement what is going on in the httpd mod_proxy side. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33558] - When the master node is enter again, only the first request is not replicated.
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=33558. 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=33558 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-21 05:23 --- I think DeltaRequest already has to be in DeltaSession when setAttribute called before requestCompleted. And this patch works when a master node starts, DeltaRequest of only the session that the replication has been done from a slave node is initialized. The reliability of the session persistence is raised further. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] New: - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 Summary: RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.7 Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] If a HttpServletRequestWrapper overrides the getServletPath() method to return it's own value, a RequestDispatcher.forward will forward to that resource, even when obtaining the RequestDispatcher with getRequestDispatcher(String). I believe the servlet spec says that it should forward to the resource specified in getRequestDispatcher. This also occurs on the latest Tomcat 4 - should I open a bug there too? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 18:06 --- Created an attachment (id=14316) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14316action=view) Simple war file displaying the problem -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 18:09 --- Please explain the problem better. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 18:12 --- I'm not sure how to describe it better. Will the attached .war file (a very simple application made to display this problem) not suffice? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 18:21 --- Cool, but I think it happens because the request, which is mapped to the Jasper servlet (*.jsp) will look at the servlet path to decide which JSP to serve. Since your wrapper will still be at the top of the wrapper stack after the forward as per the spec (this is so that wrapping is actually useful), the path specified in the wrapper will be used. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 18:21 --- The case is much simpler than what I though, so it is enough. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 18:38 --- But SRV.14.2.8 states: ServletContext.getRequestDispatcher(String) Returns a RequestDispatcher object that acts as a wrapper for the resource located at the given path. A RequestDispatcher object can be used to forward a request to the resource or to include the resource in a response. The resource can be dynamic or static. Doesn't that state the it should forward to the String specified in getRequestDispatcher(String)? Also, SRV.14.2.5 states: RequestDispatcher.forward(ServletRequest, ServletResponse) For a RequestDispatcher obtained via getRequestDispatcher(), the ServletRequest object has its path elements and parameters adjusted to match the path of the target resource. Are you saying there's a conflict elsewhere in the spec? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33640] - RequestDispatcher.forward forwards to incorrect resource when the request is wrapped with a set servletPath
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=33640. 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=33640 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-18 18:53 --- I suggest you read my answer. Here it is another way: - /uri.jsp maps to Jasper *.jsp - Request is fowarded to the JSP servlet - Your wrapper is the top of the wrapper stack (will be called first by Jasper) - The main Jasper servlet uses getServletPath to determine which JSP it should send Workaround: precompile (this maps your individual JSPs as servlets, and avoids Jasper). Please do not reopen the report, or I'll close the report again without any further comments. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33588] - HEAD request are sent as GET in NameVirtualHost using mod_jk
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=33588. 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=33588 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |tomcat- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-15 18:39 --- This bug only appears with mod_jk and not with a regular apache static file server or a tomcat server behind mod_proxy. Could it be related to AJP13 or something like that ? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33588] - HEAD request are sent as GET in NameVirtualHost using mod_jk
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=33588. 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=33588 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-15 20:33 --- Same bug reorted to tomcat-dev today: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-devm=110846894706676w=2 Fixed by Mladen Turk in development tree for 1.2.9: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-devm=110846972011636w=2 and http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-devm=110846948908355w=2 -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33558] New: - When the master node is enter again, only the first request is not replicated.
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=33558.
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=33558
Summary: When the master node is enter again, only the first
request is not replicated.
Product: Tomcat 5
Version: 5.0.28
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Catalina:Cluster
AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whenever I call a JSP, a session is created by the master node(i.e. the node
receiving the HTTP req) and replicated to the slave node.
And when the master node is down, the request failover to the slave node.
However, when the master node is enter again in my cluster and the request
failback to the master node, only the first request is not replicated to the
slave node.
I debug tomcat, and found that when the first repuest calles
DeltaSession.setAttribute(), DeltaSession.deltaRequest is null(not init)!
Therefore, I made the following patches.
--- DeltaManager.java.org 2004-08-29 09:14:12.0 +0900
+++ DeltaManager.java 2005-02-14 20:45:21.0 +0900
@@ -455,6 +455,7 @@
session.access();
//make sure that the session gets ready to expire if
needed
session.setAccessCount(0);
+session.resetDeltaRequest();
sessions.put(session.getId(), session);
}
} catch (ClassNotFoundException e) {
--
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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33558] - When the master node is enter again, only the first request is not replicated.
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=33558. 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=33558 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OS/Version|Windows XP |Linux -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33515] New: - Add too big item to request attrbiute in filter
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=33515. 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=33515 Summary: Add too big item to request attrbiute in filter Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.0.28 Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P2 Component: Servlet JSP API AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] If object (in my case SAXSource) is added to request attribute in filter and the object inside attribute is big enough it causes random failures on page load. Usually page is cutted half (end of the page is not sent to browser). I haven't tested how big object should be but seems classical buffer overflow on some point of chain. At least it would be nice to see some exception if object is too big to be handled. Don't know if it matters but I have 3 filters on the filter chain. I added SAXSource at filter 2. I don't think that I should store big object on the request attribute anyway but this was the case in one tester I made. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33515] - Add too big item to request attrbiute in filter
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=33515. 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=33515 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-11 10:08 --- Please provide a ready to test .war, as simple as possible. There is no buffer overflow possible in Java, so you can remove that from the list of possible explanations ;) Similarly, attributes are simply stored in a regular HashMap without any transformation, so there cannot be any issue with Tomcat there. The only possible problem is if you have ServletRequestAttributeListener listeners defined in your application, in which case the code is slightly more complex (although it looks bug free to me). -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31567] - 505 request error from .NET client
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=31567. 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=31567 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|blocker |enhancement Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-03 17:02 --- (In reply to comment #10) Can you please be more specific? What is wrong with the requests from the client? I can't tell if you have issue with data on the original or second request. The orignal request. See RFC 2616 Section 8.2.3. And, like Remy has said many times, this is invalid, so please stop wasting everybody's time by reopening it. Hello folks, I'm having a problem similar to the piotr's one, but in a different context and concluded that the .net client does not have a bad behavior. Tomcat on the other side isn't behaving improperly, but could behave better. Here goes: On section 8.2.3 it states that a client does not need to wait indefinitively for a server to respond with an 100 Continue message before starting to send it's body content of a request with the expect header. The M$ does it, and I believe they do it for performance reasons (perhaps it's a: we ask if we can, but let's starting sending while the response does not come back, we win time if the response is positive) while the spec says that it's ok to do that because of the compatibility with older implementations of HTTP. It also says that if the server starts to receive data from the client, he may ommit the 100 continue response message. Plus, it also says that, when the server refuses an request with the expect header, and already received data it MAY close the transport connection or it MAY to continue read and then discard the rest of the request. So, TOMCAT doesn't do either, but does half of the second MAY. Now, if 505 error occurs because of the data on input stream (the body of the previous request) that is understood as a new request, I believe that the SPEC is not very clear about the issue and perhaps it should be more 'rule- enforcing'. In that case I believe that the server SHOULD close the transport connection OR it SHOULD read all data AND then discard it. Since TOMCAT already reads it (i supose it is the origin of the 505 error), I believe it also should discard it. That would be great for me, since I wouldn't need to add a if-command in my code :) Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31567] - 505 request error from .NET client
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=31567. 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=31567 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-03 17:14 --- It is obviously implied that the client MUST (caps as per the spec) wait a reasonable amount of time (Tomcat will return the 401 response nearly instantaneaously). If it does not, then there's absolutely no point in using expectations, and they should just remove the header. The spec is great and all, but there's little possibility to determine, if a client announces an expectation but doesn't use it (which isn't explicitely forbidden), if more data is subsequent pipelined requests, or if it's the body which was incorrectly sent. I believe Tomcat's behavior is the intended one. If you want the other behavior, you have one line of code to remove (inputBuffer.setSwallowInput(false); in Http11Processor), or add 401 as a disconnect status code. Tomcat reads the rest of the stream as the next request, so the last part of your comment isn't accurate. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33217] New: - [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password
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=33217. 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=33217 Summary: [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.0.28 Platform: PC OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] After switching our server from ISO-8859-1 to UTF-8 users with german umlauts in their name couldnt login anymore using BasicAuthentication. For me it looks like the org.apache.catalina.authenticator.BasicAuthenticator do not honor the characterEncoding of the request. Attached you could find a patch which _should_ fix it, though I havent even compiled it (just tested within the debugger) as I do not have a tomcat development environment setup. If one of the developer could check this out - and - if it makes it into tomcat - please attach a BasicAuthenticator.class to this bug as drop-in into a tomcat installation. This would be VERY VERY great. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33217] - [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password
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=33217. 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=33217 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 15:30 --- Created an attachment (id=14080) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14080action=view) honor request charset -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33217] - [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password
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=33217. 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=33217 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 16:10 --- BASIC is implemented as a header. Any encoding used here is proprietary (or please point me to the part of the relevant RFCs where this is specified). -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33217] - [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password
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=33217. 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=33217 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 16:26 --- Event then, I tried it on an UTF-8 only system and from windows with firefox and IE. They all transfer the base64 encoded string as ISO-8859-1 string. But I understand your point. Might it be aceptable for you if I send a patch where the Base64.decode stuff is extracted into its own methods to allow easy override of BasicAuthenticator? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33217] - [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password
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=33217. 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=33217 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 17:41 --- Yes, it's a good point too. I see that it is a lot better to specify the encoding explicitely where it would be unspecified (defaulting to platform encoding is very bad). I would also think that anything other than ISO-8859-1 would be bad. I would say that Tomcat 5.5 uses this encoding (I'm not 100% sure, but it seems ok). Note: you can configure the authenticators used (see Authenticators.properties in package startup), or add them as valves. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33217] - [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password
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=33217. 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=33217 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 17:59 --- Authenticators.properties: Thanks - I already solved my problem by changing it ;-) Tomcat 5.5: I check it out, maybe its time to migrate. Thanks! -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33217] - [patch] request charset not honored when parsing username/password
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=33217. 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=33217 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-24 20:17 --- (In reply to comment #2) BASIC is implemented as a header. Any encoding used here is proprietary (or please point me to the part of the relevant RFCs where this is specified). RFC 2617 Section 2 defines both 'userid' and 'password' as type 'TEXT', which is defined in RFC 2616 section 2.2 as being (mostly) iso-8859-1. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 10:44 --- i have also tried this out for you. i wrote 1 basic servlet that acquired the session and added a String attribute, 1 basic filter that attempted to acquire that attribute from the session, and 1 jsp that was forwarded to using a RequestDispatcher from the basic servlet after the session attribute was added. this was configured in web.xml with a filter-mapping using a url-pattern for the location of the jsp, i.e /tests/33058.jsp. the jsp also tries to output the session attribute. test 1 revealed that the filter is not even touched when the basic servlet is requested. the jsp is arrived at however, and does output the correct session attribute. i consulted the servlet 2.4 specification and found that in 2.4 you add an element called dispatcher to the filter-mapping so that RequestDispatchers work with the url-pattern (section 6.2.5) i change the filter-mapping to filter-mapping filter-nameBasic Filter/filter-name url-pattern/views/test/*/url-pattern dispatcherFORWARD/dispatcher /filter-mapping running this test reveals that the filter _can_ access the session value: String myAttribute = (String) ((HttpServletRequest) request). getSession().getAttribute(myAttribute); hope this helps. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31643] - form type not int request parameters
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=31643. 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=31643 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|WORKSFORME | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 20:51 --- These are the form values on the page that are being submitted SERVLET_ID: 62 SOSAppName: Centryx ApplicantId: 0 Dependent: 0 SOSSessionID: 9184588546283453306;2058814459169579844 The input type=submit name=Submit does not show up under the request.getParameter(Submit) it returns a java.lang.NullPointerException. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31643] - form type not in request parameters
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=31643. 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=31643 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|form type not int request |form type not in request |parameters |parameters -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31643] - form type not in request parameters
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=31643. 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=31643 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|5.0.28 |5.5.6 -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31643] - form type not in request parameters
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=31643. 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=31643 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|critical|blocker Priority|P3 |P1 -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31643] - form type not in request parameters
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=31643. 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=31643 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 21:02 --- and the value of the Submit should be Edit -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31643] - form type not in request parameters
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=31643. 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=31643 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-14 23:31 --- Please post on tomcat-user instead. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://www.vincebloise.info/ ||bfg.war Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-13 15:01 --- The linked war file (http://www.vincebloise.info/bfg.war) contains the source as well as class files. Please run the application and notice how the Filter implementation request has a null session when filtering from the main.jsp page. The application asks for a user id and password, but it will take anything in these fields. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-13 15:03 --- I cannot access your test case. Please attach it to the bug report (it's quite easy to do). -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-13 18:22 --- I got the test case (which is an anything but minimal JSF-Struts webapp :( ; this is not a user support forum, and we don't do find-whatever-is-wrong-in-your-webapp work), and I still do not understand what the problem could be. Please state clearly what the problem is. Overall, I doubt there's a bug with session handling. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-13 19:01 --- (In reply to comment #4) I got the test case (which is an anything but minimal JSF-Struts webapp :( ; this is not a user support forum, and we don't do find-whatever-is-wrong-in-your-webapp work), and I still do not understand what the problem could be. Please state clearly what the problem is. Overall, I doubt there's a bug with session handling. (In reply) The problem: An object is placed in the session scope via HttpSession = request.getSession() session.setAttribute(...) in a servlet. That servlet then forwards the request to a JSP page in a directory that is monitored by a filter servlet. The filter servlet attempts to retrieve the session attribute from the request via session.getSessionAttribute(...) and finds that the request's session has all its attributes set to null. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-13 19:07 --- Then, this works for me. Please do not reopen the report. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] New: - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 Summary: Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.4 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Servlet JSP API AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In processing the filter chain in a class that implements the Filter interface, the request parameter has a null session and nulled out parameters. This only happens after the first use of the filter. The first time the filter is executed the session is populated and everything works. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33058] - Request session null after chain.doFilter() in Filter class
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=33058. 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=33058 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-12 11:02 --- I don't understand what your problem is. Please submit a ready to test war. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28904] - Multipart form problem lost when request is passed to code.
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=28904. 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=28904 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-10 22:28 --- I have tested this with a simple JSP using the latest tomcat sources and it works. Given that it works for you with a servlet I don't think the Apache-Tomcat connector is an issue. However, if you still see this with the latest version of Tomcat 4.1.x and the latest JK connector, please re-open this bug. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27315] - Coyote java.util.ConcurrentModificationException removing request processor
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=27315. 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=27315 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-07 16:49 --- *** Bug 30063 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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]
Handling HEAD request in servlet
Hi guys, I have a problem where the default implementation of HttpServlet doesn't seem to be handling doHead(request, response) properly. I over-rode the method, and found the damndest thing happening. The line response.setContentLength(length) is just getting completely ignored. I can't work it out - it's like the response object is deliberately preventing me from setting the content-length. I tried setHeader(Content-Length, length) just in case but still no joy. Help!? Please! - Here's the code snippet : FileInputStream inStream = null; inStream = new FileInputStream(ncFile); int length = (int)ncFile.length(); response.setStatus(response.SC_PARTIAL_CONTENT); response.setHeader(Accept-Ranges, bytes); response.setContentLength(length); response.setHeader(Content-Length-Mimic, +(int)ncFile.length()); response.setHeader(Impossible, + length); response.setContentType(contentType); out.flush(); Here's what I get back via telnet : HTTP/1.1 206 Partial Content Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 05:07:22 GMT Server: Apache/2.0.50 (Ubuntu) mod_jk2/2.0.4 Set-Cookie: JSESSIONID=3D6C4C6EBE1AB1672E40C2933243BA3B; Path=/marslet Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-Length-Mimic: 36903060 Impossible: 36903060 Content-Type: application/x-netcdf Keep-Alive: timeout=15, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Fwd: Re: Handling HEAD request in servlet]
Hello list, Someone who seems able to recieve mail from this list but has some problem sending asked me to forward the following message :: Cheers, -T ---BeginMessage--- Hi tennessee Could u do me a favour still my tomcat memebership is not approved .So i have an urgent problem get sloved.Can u please forward this massage to the maling list? I'm running on suse Linux and I have installed gsoap there.I want to configure tomcat as my web app server for gsoap.how this possible .Is there a already built conf module orSO file for this? can any body help me on this Thanks Kanchana On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 16:09:37 +1100, Tennessee Leeuwenburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi guys, I have a problem where the default implementation of HttpServlet doesn't seem to be handling doHead(request, response) properly. I over-rode the method, and found the damndest thing happening. The line response.setContentLength(length) is just getting completely ignored. I can't work it out - it's like the response object is deliberately preventing me from setting the content-length. I tried setHeader(Content-Length, length) just in case but still no joy. Help!? Please! - Here's the code snippet : FileInputStream inStream = null; inStream = new FileInputStream(ncFile); int length = (int)ncFile.length(); response.setStatus(response.SC_PARTIAL_CONTENT); response.setHeader(Accept-Ranges, bytes); response.setContentLength(length); response.setHeader(Content-Length-Mimic, +(int)ncFile.length()); response.setHeader(Impossible, + length); response.setContentType(contentType); out.flush(); Here's what I get back via telnet : HTTP/1.1 206 Partial Content Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 05:07:22 GMT Server: Apache/2.0.50 (Ubuntu) mod_jk2/2.0.4 Set-Cookie: JSESSIONID=3D6C4C6EBE1AB1672E40C2933243BA3B; Path=/marslet Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-Length-Mimic: 36903060 Impossible: 36903060 Content-Type: application/x-netcdf Keep-Alive: timeout=15, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---End Message--- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-03 17:44 --- (In reply to comment #10) Neither that file size or date match anything in the JK downloads. I am guessing that someone built the .dll from the source. It is just not possible for me to determine what source was used. What I suggest is trying the latest JK - 1.2.8 and see if that works. One random thought - might this be related to bug 27796? This dll came with the Tomcat. If I got this dll form a newer version from tomcat wont conflit with the version we're using? About bug 27796 I don't think is the same case because we aren't using special caracteres. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-03 17:57 --- JK 1.2.8 will be fine with your Tomcat version. Test it and report back. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31741] - servlet request forward to jsp with jsp:include tag can cause extra request to be submitted
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=31741. 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=31741 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-01 20:38 --- This works as expected if tested directly with Tomcat 4.1.x from CVS HEAD (no Apache). Either this is a Tomcat 4 bug that has been fixed in 4.1.31 or a JK2 bug. I suspect that a JK2 bug is most likely. However, JK2 is no longer supported (see text below so i am marking this as WONTFIX). JK2 Support Information follows: As of November 15, 2004, JK2 is no longer supported. All bugs related to JK2 will be marked as WONTFIX. In its place, some of its features have been backported to jk1. Most of those features will be seen in 1.2.7, which is slated for release on November 30th, 2004. Another alternative is the ajp addition to mod_proxy which will be part of apache 2. For more information on the Tomat connectors docs at http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/connectors-doc/ -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9702] - JNDIRealm StartTLS/SSL support request
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=9702. 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=9702 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|[EMAIL PROTECTED]| AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|tomcat- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 19:54 --- Please do not add individuals to the cc list or re-assign bugs to individuals without their consent. I consider such behaviour to be both rude and inconsiderate. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 19:56 --- Back to my original question. I was not asking which JDK you were using, I asked which version of JK. To put it another way, which version of the JK connector (the software that connects IIS to Tomcat) are you using? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|[EMAIL PROTECTED], | |[EMAIL PROTECTED]| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 20:13 --- (In reply to comment #4) Back to my original question. I was not asking which JDK you were using, I asked which version of JK. To put it another way, which version of the JK connector (the software that connects IIS to Tomcat) are you using? About the Ccs... I really don't know how it work.. I thought I should assing again to all the others I've assigned once. The conector is AJp13 - this is the class: org.apache.ajp.tomcat4.Ajp13Connector -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 20:33 --- No, AJP13 is not the JK version. AJP1.3 is the protocol. Where did you get isapi_redirect.dll from? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 20:36 --- (In reply to comment #6) No, AJP13 is not the JK version. AJP1.3 is the protocol. Where did you get isapi_redirect.dll from? Well so I don't know where I can see which version it is.. I just saw this on the BES console. About the isapi we got from the Tomcat. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 20:44 --- OK. Lets try and narrow it down. What is the date of the dll file? What is its size (exactly) in bytes? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 20:59 --- (In reply to comment #8) OK. Lets try and narrow it down. What is the date of the dll file? What is its size (exactly) in bytes? March 23th, 2004 114.688 bytes -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32519] - Processing of multipart/form-data request failed
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=32519. 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=32519 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-30 21:46 --- Neither that file size or date match anything in the JK downloads. I am guessing that someone built the .dll from the source. It is just not possible for me to determine what source was used. What I suggest is trying the latest JK - 1.2.8 and see if that works. One random thought - might this be related to bug 27796? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9702] - JNDIRealm StartTLS/SSL support request
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=9702. 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=9702 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-29 15:03 --- What is the status of StartTLS support? -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 21146] - Request variables from Apache are not available in Tomcat
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=21146. 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=21146 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-23 16:32 --- To be able to get the auth from webserver in front use the tomcatAuthentication=false inside your Connector port=8009 ... / -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32795] New: - If RequestDumperValve is enabled, the request parameter value parsed by default character encoding is always returned.
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=32795. 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=32795 Summary: If RequestDumperValve is enabled, the request parameter value parsed by default character encoding is always returned. Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.0.30 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In Tomcat container that enabled the RequestDumperValve valve, request.setCharacterEncoding method doesn't affect the behavior of request.getParameter method, so servlet or jsp cannot correctly get any multi-byte characters contained in the request parameter. On the other hand, if the RequestDumperValve valve is disabled, the request parameter that contains multi-byte characters is done correctly. This issue occurs in both GET and POST requests, and also Tomcat 4.1.31 release. Root cause: It seems that the logging processes of the request infomations are worked in RequestDumperValve, before calling servlet, jsp, and filter. In that case, naturally, the request character encoding contained in them is null value and RequestDumperValve prints out it, and it also prints out an information about request parameters. Then, any request parameters are initially parsed by default encoding (=8859_1), because character encoding of request is null. In CoyoteRequest, when the method to get request parameter is called, parsing of request parameters is processed for only one time. After this initial parsing of request parameters, the setter method of request character encoding doesn't affect the behavior of getter methods of request parameter at all. For that reason, even if the setter method of request character encoding is often invoked in servlet or jsp, or filter, the request parameter value that was initially parsed by default encoding is always returned. Workaround: Customize and substitute the filter class equivalent to the RequestDumperValve valve. RequestDumperFilter class contained in examples application is a good guide. Regards, Kan Ogawa -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32795] - If RequestDumperValve is enabled, the request parameter value parsed by default character encoding is always returned.
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=32795. 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=32795 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|major |enhancement --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-22 20:29 --- This behaviour is clearly documented. quote WARNING: Using this valve has side-effects. The output from this valve includes any parameters included with the request. The parameters will be decoded using the default platform encoding. Any subsequent calls to request.setCharacterEncoding() within the web application will have no effect. /quote Changing the status of this to an enhancement request. -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 21146] - Request variables from Apache are not available in Tomcat
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=21146. 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=21146 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Component|Connector:Coyote JK 2 |Connector:JK/AJP ||(deprecated) OS/Version||All -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 21939] - Coyote JK 2 outputs request parameters
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=21939. 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=21939 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-22 21:45 --- As of November 15, 2004, JK2 is no longer supported. All bugs related to JK2 will be marked as WONTFIX. In its place, some of its features have been backported to jk1. Most of those features will be seen in 1.2.7, which is slated for release on November 30th, 2004. Another alternative is the ajp addition to mod_proxy which will be part of apache 2. For more information on the Tomat connectors docs at http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/connectors-doc/ -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26977] - Request received is corrupt (SOMETIMES)
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=26977. 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=26977 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-22 21:49 --- As of November 15, 2004, JK2 is no longer supported. All bugs related to JK2 will be marked as WONTFIX. In its place, some of its features have been backported to jk1. Most of those features will be seen in 1.2.7, which is slated for release on November 30th, 2004. Another alternative is the ajp addition to mod_proxy which will be part of apache 2. For more information on the Tomat connectors docs at http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/connectors-doc/ -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26541] - Empty request parameters are stripped as the request passes through the JK connector
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=26541. 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=26541 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-22 21:52 --- As of November 15, 2004, JK2 is no longer supported. All bugs related to JK2 will be marked as WONTFIX. In its place, some of its features have been backported to jk1. Most of those features will be seen in 1.2.7, which is slated for release on November 30th, 2004. Another alternative is the ajp addition to mod_proxy which will be part of apache 2. For more information on the Tomat connectors docs at http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/connectors-doc/ -- 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]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31567] - 505 request error from .NET client
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=31567. 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=31567 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-22 22:29 --- Can you please be more specific? What is wrong with the requests from the client? I can't tell if you have issue with data on the original or second request. The client does not know that it will be challenged until it sends the original request and receives the 401. Furthermore, the HTTP spec RFC 2616 Section 10.4.2 states: - The client MAY repeat the request with a suitable Authorization header field. It does not indicate that the request should not contain data. If you could point us to the specification that these requests violate that would help a lot. -- 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]
