Please file a ticket in our Jira.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Oliver Zemann <oliver.zem...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 303 would execute a GET instead of POST on the new url. More over, i need
> *something* which works when cookies are rejected by the browser. I would
> prefer 302 but 302 does not work when cookies are disabled because wicket
> checks if its a temporarly or permanent move - if its permanent it sets the
> Location header, otherwise not (which makes troubles). And i still dont
> think this is jetty related. I will test this in a few days when i find
> some time on glassfish. As workaround i use 301 but i guess the customer
> will notice that and complain, because 301 has some impact on URLs
> (bookmarks, cache etc.) in the browser.
>
>
> 2013/4/4 Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@apache.org>
>
> > OK, I see
> >
> > public RedirectRequestHandler(final String redirectUrl, final int status)
> > {
> > if ((status != HttpServletResponse.SC_MOVED_PERMANENTLY) &&
> > (status != HttpServletResponse.SC_MOVED_TEMPORARILY))
> > {
> > throw new IllegalStateException("Status must be either 301 or 302, but
> was:
> > " + status);
> > }
> >
> > I'm not sure why there is such restriction. Maybe Igor can explain, git
> > blames him.
> >
> > What is your reason to use code 303 ? How its semantics are better than
> 302
> > in your case ?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Oliver Zemann <oliver.zem...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > But the warning is thrown by wicket itself that 303 is not allowed. So
> i
> > am
> > > very sure this is a wicket problem. I use jetty 9 as web server. So the
> > > problems with 301/302 could be related to jetty, but the not working
> 303
> > (i
> > > get that exception in wicket) is some kind of problem in wicket.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2013/4/4 Martin Grigorov <mgrigo...@apache.org>
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm not familiar with http code 303 (see other) but if there is a
> > problem
> > > > then you should ask in the forums of the used web container or web
> > > browser.
> > > > Wicket just sets response headers via Servlet APIs but the actual
> work
> > is
> > > > done by the container - to set the header, and by the browser - to
> read
> > > the
> > > > value and interpret it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Oliver Zemann <
> > oliver.zem...@gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi
> > > > >
> > > > > I created a wicket quickstart:
> > > > > https://github.com/olze/WicketRedirect.git
> > > > >
> > > > > The SC_SEE_OTHER which is defined in the RFC for HTTP 1.1 (iirc
> Jan.
> > > > 1997)
> > > > > was explaining that this should work (sending a post to the
> > application
> > > > > which uses GET to get the page from the redirected URL) is not
> > working,
> > > > it
> > > > > says only 301 and 302 are allowed.
> > > > > Why?
> > > > >
> > > > > When using 301 it works as expected when cookies are disabled. When
> > > > cookies
> > > > > are disabled and 302 is used, it redirects to the local site and
> not
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > external one because of the missing Location header. Is this a bug
> or
> > > > did i
> > > > > understand something wrong? I thought 302 should be used when
> wicket
> > > > should
> > > > > redirect to an external URL.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Oliver
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Martin Grigorov
> > > > jWeekend
> > > > Training, Consulting, Development
> > > > http://jWeekend.com <http://jweekend.com/>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Martin Grigorov
> > jWeekend
> > Training, Consulting, Development
> > http://jWeekend.com <http://jweekend.com/>
> >
>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com <http://jweekend.com/>
