Rémy,
On 9/28/15 3:33 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2015-09-27 14:32 GMT+02:00 Christopher Schultz > :
>
>>
>> In general, I think that the proposal to abandon AJP and use HTTP/2
>> instead makes a lot of sense. However, AJP still does offer an advantage
>> over HTTP/1 or HTTP/2: it allows informat
2015-09-27 14:32 GMT+02:00 Christopher Schultz :
>
> In general, I think that the proposal to abandon AJP and use HTTP/2
> instead makes a lot of sense. However, AJP still does offer an advantage
> over HTTP/1 or HTTP/2: it allows information to be passed out-of-band
> with respect to the message
Jean-Frederic,
On 9/25/15 7:58 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> On 09/25/2015 10:51 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
>> 2015-09-25 9:29 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
>>
>>> I'm not so sure. HTTP/2 explicitly doesn't support HTTP upgrade. The
>>> HTTP/2 spec expects protocols like WebSocket to use ALPN. Despite
On 25/09/2015 18:38, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 25/09/2015 17:05, Andrew Carr wrote:
>> Rémy,
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> I reread what I asked about the wiki and I realize it might not have been
>> clear. Mark said,
>> *"Long term, we probably do need to migrate the wiki. Short term we
>> can **use
On 25/09/2015 17:05, Andrew Carr wrote:
> Rémy,
>
> Thank you.
>
> I reread what I asked about the wiki and I realize it might not have been
> clear. Mark said,
> *"Long term, we probably do need to migrate the wiki. Short term we
> can **use the new instance just for this." *
> and I was
Rémy,
Thank you.
I reread what I asked about the wiki and I realize it might not have been
clear. Mark said,
*"Long term, we probably do need to migrate the wiki. Short term we
can **use the new instance just for this." *
and I was curious about access, is it already out there and I just d
2015-09-25 17:43 GMT+02:00 Andrew Carr :
> Mark,
>
> Couple of questions. What wiki is the "new" cwiki? Will my wiki account
> from the old server be transferred to the new cwiki?
>
> Devs,
>
> I see arguments for and against the protocol upgrade. Based on different
> opinions, so far, we are i
Mark,
Couple of questions. What wiki is the "new" cwiki? Will my wiki account
from the old server be transferred to the new cwiki?
Devs,
I see arguments for and against the protocol upgrade. Based on different
opinions, so far, we are inadvertently building a list of options for the
future of
The one really compelling /usability /bit about AJP proxying is that
requests look like you're in/at the web server in question and receiving
requests directly from the client of the web server.
The fact that you are not is completely and utterly transparent to your
web application code.
The
On 09/25/2015 10:51 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
2015-09-25 9:29 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
I'm not so sure. HTTP/2 explicitly doesn't support HTTP upgrade. The
HTTP/2 spec expects protocols like WebSocket to use ALPN. Despite this,
there has been work to try and layer WebSocket on top of HTTP/2.
At
2015-09-25 9:29 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
> I'm not so sure. HTTP/2 explicitly doesn't support HTTP upgrade. The
> HTTP/2 spec expects protocols like WebSocket to use ALPN. Despite this,
> there has been work to try and layer WebSocket on top of HTTP/2.
>
> At this point in time proxying WebSocket i
On 24/09/2015 14:48, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2015-09-24 15:13 GMT+02:00 Andrew Carr :
>
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:52 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
>>
>>> 2015-09-24 11:04 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
>>>
I think there is a clear case for a new version. The first thing to do
would be to pull a
ropriate word.
>
>
>>> I do see some updates in the last year to the
>>> enhancements page and some of the bugs, but there is not much activity.
>> I
>>> search for "enhancements" under the Tomcat Connectors project in Bugzilla
>>> because i
enhancements page and some of the bugs, but there is not much activity.
> I
> > search for "enhancements" under the Tomcat Connectors project in Bugzilla
> > because it does not seem as though there is a specific category for AJP
> > Protocol enhancements. I am very i
2015-09-24 15:13 GMT+02:00 Andrew Carr :
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:52 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
>
> > 2015-09-24 11:04 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
> >
> > > I think there is a clear case for a new version. The first thing to do
> > > would be to pull all the ideas together in one place (I'm thinkin
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:52 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2015-09-24 11:04 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
>
> > I think there is a clear case for a new version. The first thing to do
> > would be to pull all the ideas together in one place (I'm thinking the
> > wiki), agree what needs to be in AJP.next a
2015-09-24 11:04 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
> I think there is a clear case for a new version. The first thing to do
> would be to pull all the ideas together in one place (I'm thinking the
> wiki), agree what needs to be in AJP.next and then work on updating the
> specification to accommodate it.
>
ome of the bugs, but there is not much activity. I
search for "enhancements" under the Tomcat Connectors project in Bugzilla
because it does not seem as though there is a specific category for AJP
Protocol enhancements. I am very interested in starting work on the AJP
Protocol enhancements
ere is not much activity. I
> search for "enhancements" under the Tomcat Connectors project in Bugzilla
> because it does not seem as though there is a specific category for AJP
> Protocol enhancements. I am very interested in starting work on the AJP
> Protocol enhan
project in Bugzilla
because it does not seem as though there is a specific category for AJP
Protocol enhancements. I am very interested in starting work on the AJP
Protocol enhancements. It seems like the protocol needs a clear
specification.
Wouldn't a JSR for the protocol specification make
Henri Gomez wrote:
Well there was some provision in mind in AJP 1.4 :
Context informations forwarding for Servlet engine to Web Server
With this kind of information requested by webserver, we could
determine the version of Servlet AJP implementation and as such use
32/64k buffers.
the jk cou
Well there was some provision in mind in AJP 1.4 :
Context informations forwarding for Servlet engine to Web Server
With this kind of information requested by webserver, we could
determine the version of Servlet AJP implementation and as such use
32/64k buffers.
the jk could send question like
Costin Manolache wrote:
What's the status with mod_proxy ?
It seems this kind of change would break backward compatibility, and if
this
happens - maybe it's better to fix the protocol marshalling limitations or
change it completely.
I hate the idea of patching an old and mostly broken marshall
Mladen Turk wrote:
You see how desperate I am when writing this on Sunday :)
Was it too hot on the sea side?
Anyhow, we are pretty close to the new JK release that I
hope will be the most usable and stable whatsoever.
The things we agreed so many times before, but having
obviously too litt
Costin Manolache wrote:
What's the status with mod_proxy ?
I think Mladen idea is to make the same enhancements in mod_proxy (and I
will try to help him :-)
It seems this kind of change would break backward compatibility, and
if this
happens - maybe it's better to fix the protocol marsha
"Mladen Turk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> You see how desperate I am when writing this on Sunday :)
>
> Anyhow, we are pretty close to the new JK release that I
> hope will be the most usable and stable whatsoever.
>
> The things we agreed so many times before, b
What's the status with mod_proxy ?
It seems this kind of change would break backward compatibility, and if this
happens - maybe it's better to fix the protocol marshalling limitations or
change it completely.
I hate the idea of patching an old and mostly broken marshalling model.
The only thing
Mladen Turk wrote:
You see how desperate I am when writing this on Sunday :)
Anyhow, we are pretty close to the new JK release that I
hope will be the most usable and stable whatsoever.
The things we agreed so many times before, but having
obviously too little resources to actually create are
t
You see how desperate I am when writing this on Sunday :)
Anyhow, we are pretty close to the new JK release that I
hope will be the most usable and stable whatsoever.
The things we agreed so many times before, but having
obviously too little resources to actually create are
the 1.3 branch (aka J
29 matches
Mail list logo
