> Am 10.02.2016 um 20:09 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>
>
>
> On 02/08/2016 05:50 PM, ic...@apache.org wrote:
>> [...]#ifdef HAVE_TLSEXT
>> +#ifdef HAVE_TLS_ALPN
>> + alpn_note = apr_table_get(c->notes, "proxy-request-alpn-protos");
>> + if (alpn_note) {
>> + char *protos, *s, *p, *last;
>> + apr_size_t len;
>> +
>> + s = protos = apr_pcalloc(c->pool, strlen(alpn_note)+1);
>> + p = apr_pstrdup(c->pool, alpn_note);
>> + while ((p = apr_strtok(p, ", ", &last))) {
>> + len = last - p - (*last? 1 : 0);
>> + if (len > 255) {
>> + ap_log_cerror(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, 0, c, APLOGNO()
>> + "ALPN proxy protocol identifier too long:
>> %s",
>> + p);
>> + ssl_log_ssl_error(SSLLOG_MARK, APLOG_ERR, server);
>> + return APR_EGENERAL;
>> + }
>> + *s++ = (unsigned char)len;
>> + while (len--) {
>> + *s++ = *p++;
>> + }
>> + p = last;
>
> Why not p = NULL as it should be for subsequent calls of apr_strtok?
Matter of taste. If code is more readable to everyone using NULL, that is fine
with me.
Changed in r1729782.
Stefan
