Bill and others,
I think we fell into agreement regarding how this should work.
What does it take to go about getting this fixed in tomcat? A patch?
- Is there sufficient agreement from others that the behavior I
described is desired?
- Can anybody point me at where I might go about chang
Hi Bill,
On Aug 23, 2006, at 3:35 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
James Berry wrote:
What I'm saying is that they should not be treated independently or
differently. They should be treated not as metadata, but as part
of the
segment.
To be 100% clear; this is what Apache httpd does today.
James Berry wrote:
>
> On Aug 23, 2006, at 2:40 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> James Berry wrote:
>>>
>>> So maybe this is the crux of it. Why/where is it that "this;biz=bar"
>>> cannot be treated the same for the purposes of access control as "this"?
>>> The URL spec says that these are eq
On Aug 23, 2006, at 2:40 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
James Berry wrote:
Because Tomcat and Apache are blind to parameters, the connector -
should-
reject them. When Tomcat/Apache are able to treat your
"this;biz=bar"
example the same as "this" for the purpose of access control,
then
On Aug 23, 2006, at 2:22 PM, James Berry wrote:
Tomcat should be blind to the very existence of parameters
because it
doesn't place any meaning on them.
Perhaps I should clarify that when I say tomcat should be "blind" to
parameters, perhaps I really should have said "Tomcat should not be
James Berry wrote:
>
>> Because Tomcat and Apache are blind to parameters, the connector -should-
>> reject them. When Tomcat/Apache are able to treat your "this;biz=bar"
>> example the same as "this" for the purpose of access control, then they
>> can be enabled in an opaque manner that lets the
Hi William,
On Aug 23, 2006, at 2:05 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
James Berry wrote:
My response is that the tomcat should be completely blind to
"parameters". Basically, to Tomcat's perspective, they don't exist.
There is nothing any more special about "this;biz=bar" than
"this,biz=bar" o
James Berry wrote:
>
> My response is that the tomcat should be completely blind to
> "parameters". Basically, to Tomcat's perspective, they don't exist.
> There is nothing any more special about "this;biz=bar" than
> "this,biz=bar" or "this-biz-bar".
But, of course, your access control does call
Hi Jean-Frederic,
On Aug 23, 2006, at 1:24 PM, Jean-frederic Clere wrote:
James Berry wrote:
Jean-Frederic, Bill, Remy,
I didn't get any response to this, but would really like to hear
your thoughts on this issue of parameters within URL path
segments, which tomcat current does not allo
Jean-Frederic, Bill, Remy,
I didn't get any response to this, but would really like to hear your
thoughts on this issue of parameters within URL path segments, which
tomcat current does not allow. Can you give me any feedback?
Thanks!
James
On Aug 21, 2006, at 8:42 PM, James Berry wrote:
On Aug 21, 2006, at 6:26 PM, James Berry wrote:
Guys,
Sorry to open up this subject again. I've just read the mails in
this thread:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-dev&m=115344110306194&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-dev&m=115346837428224&w=2
Though I ca
Guys,
Sorry to open up this subject again. I've just read the mails in this
thread:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-dev&m=115344110306194&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-dev&m=115346837428224&w=2
Though I can't say I paid particular attention to the jkmount
12 matches
Mail list logo
