Trying to understand How Tomcat uses Keystore for SSL

2017-11-13 Thread Don Flinn
I've done some reading on SSL and understand the protocol is as follows; Client/Browser sends ClientHello and server Tomcat replies with ServerHello. This establishes the protocol they will use. The server then sends the certificate and the public key - in the clear The browser encrypts a message

Re: non www to www URL Rewrite

2017-11-13 Thread RAVIRAJ SHAH
Sorry didn't get you exactly But I did above setup in tomcat web server only Thanks Ravi On Mon, Nov 13, 2017, 20:45 shivashankar manukondu < sivasankar.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > Please make it these changes in your webserver > > Regards, > Siva > > On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 10:17 AM, RAVIRAJ SHAH

Re: White-space encoding issue in 8.5.16

2017-11-13 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 To whom it may concern, On 11/13/17 4:10 AM, M. Manna wrote: > Actually, it's the same issue (and even error stack) reported > here: > > http://tomcat.10.x6.nabble.com/Tomcat-8-5-4-uses-RFC-6265-by-default-w

Re: non www to www URL Rewrite

2017-11-13 Thread shivashankar manukondu
Please make it these changes in your webserver Regards, Siva On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 10:17 AM, RAVIRAJ SHAH wrote: > Thanks shiv, > > But no luck it is not working > I did configuration as below > > Created rewrite.config file in > ../conf/Catalina/example.com > >

Re: White-space encoding issue in 8.5.16

2017-11-13 Thread M. Manna
Actually, it's the same issue (and even error stack) reported here: http://tomcat.10.x6.nabble.com/Tomcat-8-5-4-uses-RFC-6265-by-default-which-does-not-appear-to-be-Servlet-3-1-compliant-td5054685.html On 13 November 2017 at 09:00, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 12/11/17 22:25, M.

Re: White-space encoding issue in 8.5.16

2017-11-13 Thread Mark Thomas
On 12/11/17 22:25, M. Manna wrote: > Hi, > > We are currently encountering an issue where some of our REST API calls > are failing because of a white-space not being encoded (i.e. %20). This has > started with 8.5.16 and our previous version didn't have this problem - > 8.0.29. > > Is this