You can prevent JSESSIONID from being encoded onto URLs for bots. At Zillow, we've done this with a ServletFilter that compares the incoming user agent to a list of known bots, and if it matches replaces the HttpServletResponse with an HttpServletResponseWrapper that makes the encodeURL, encodeUrl, encodeRedirectURL, and encodeRedirectUrl methods into no-ops (simply returning their inputs).
jeff -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 4:08 PM To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: Remove jsessionid from static resources? Tapestry has several services. Asset and XTile services are marked as stateless. All others are marked as stateful. Now, all urls for links are eventually created by org.apache.tapestry.engine.EngineServiceLink That class receives the stateful flag, but starting from a 4.0 beta something version, it ignores it. This means that all urls have cycle.encodeURL() called on them. That call eventually calls tomcat's or jetty's or whatever implementation and results in jsessionid getting appended... The call to cycle.encodeURL() can of course be made only when stateful is true, but this was changed in order to fix some portlet api issues... I'm clearly in favor of changing this back but i need to see what happens in portlet mode. Could portlet tapestry simply use its own implementation of EngineServiceLink? >From Henri Dupre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The jsessionid is actually an important issue for making web sites search > engine friendly. > Currently, when google will suck your website, they will take all the > jsessionid. > I'd like to be able to get rid of them for all links when the user agent > contains "bot". > > Anyway I'm not sure this is a tapestry issue... I read posts on the tomcat > mailing list and I did not see any solution for preventing the URL > rewriting. I somehow have the feel that this is a tomcat limitation... > > > On 6/14/06, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Jesse, > > > > Happen to make any progress on this? > > > > Thanks, > > Kevin > > > > On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:08:52 -0400, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > Not sure right now but I'm "starring" this conversation in gmail and > > will > > > look it up tonight when I do my "hobby work"... > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Thanks, > > Henri. > -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
