> On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Remy Maucherat wrote: > > > Some valves in the Catalina pipeline use that. > > > > It probably should be done at the protocol layer, but I can't do that for > > compatibility reasons, so I think the socket should be set as a note in the > > Request object (as is suggested in the commented out code in the HTTP/1.1 > > protocol handler). > > Ok. I hope the code can deal with 'no socket' case - since in Ajp case > the socket is completely useless.
Apparently, the only class which uses that method is o.a.c.valves.CertificatesValve. It handles the case where getSocket returns null. > I have big doubts the code that calls getSocket() can even work with ajp > or pureTLS or other things. Probably a good idea to find where it is and > call the right thing ( like getAttribute for certs, etc ). I'm not sure about it, but it doesn't look like client-cert would work with PureTLS. > > > - Any reason for not extending HttpBaseRequest ? > > > > You mean HttpRequestBase in Catalina ? > > This object's implementation is bad, and I wanted to deprecate it to make > > that obvious. There's little code duplication overall. > > There's also no ugly casts to the XXBase objects in the Catalina pipeline > > (everthing uses the interfaces), so it works fine. > > > > I'll do a CoyoteConnector2 for Catalina soon too to see how it works. > > Probably tomorrow. > > Ok, what about CoyoteConnector3 ? I already started with 2 :-) It's quite simple to do. I'll do it at least to learn how to manipulate the new interface, and see if there are problems with the new Http11Protocol class. > ( but I'll start working on Jk if you do the Connector ) That's not something I can do, so that looks like a good idea :) Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
