Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-22 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 André, On 11/22/16 5:51 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote: > So now, considering that such a thing would seem to have overall > an overwhelming positive effect and no negative effect that we can > think of, how would one go about proposing it ? For o

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-22 Thread tomcat
On 21.11.2016 18:09, Christopher Schultz wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 André, :) On 11/19/16 12:31 PM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote: With respect, this is not only "André's problem". Agreed. I apologize if it seemed like I was suggesting that you are the only one c

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-21 Thread Igal @ Lucee.org
On 11/21/2016 9:09 AM, Christopher Schultz wrote: André, :) Cute, very cute. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-21 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 André, :) On 11/19/16 12:31 PM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote: > With respect, this is not only "André's problem". Agreed. I apologize if it seemed like I was suggesting that you are the only one complaining. > I would also posit that this being

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-19 Thread tomcat
On 18.11.2016 20:27, Christopher Schultz wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Konstantin, On 11/18/16 2:10 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: One more authority, that I forgot to mention in my mail: IANA registry of mime types Registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-type

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-18 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Konstantin, On 11/18/16 2:10 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > One more authority, that I forgot to mention in my mail: IANA > registry of mime types > > Registry: > https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml > > Registration en

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-18 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
2016-11-18 19:02 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz : > André, > > On 11/18/16 3:50 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote: >> On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote: >>> Since UTF-8 is supposed to be the "official" character encoding, >> >> Now where is that specified ? As far as I know, the default

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-18 Thread tomcat
On 18.11.2016 17:02, Christopher Schultz wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 André, On 11/18/16 3:50 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote: On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote: Since UTF-8 is supposed to be the "official" character encoding, Now where is that specif

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-18 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 André, On 11/18/16 3:50 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote: > On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote: >> Since UTF-8 is supposed to be the "official" character encoding, > > Now where is that specified ? As far as I know, the default > chars

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-18 Thread tomcat
On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Konstantin, On 11/17/16 4:58 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: 2016-11-17 17:21 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz : All, I've got a problem with a vendor and I'd like another opinion just to make sure I'm

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-17 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Konstantin, On 11/17/16 4:58 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > 2016-11-17 17:21 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz > : >> All, >> >> I've got a problem with a vendor and I'd like another opinion >> just to make sure I'm not crazy. The vendor and I have a

Re: Sanity Check

2016-11-17 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
2016-11-17 17:21 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz : > All, > > I've got a problem with a vendor and I'd like another opinion just to > make sure I'm not crazy. The vendor and I have a difference of opinion > about how a character should be encoded in an HTTP POST request. > > The vendor's API officia

Sanity Check

2016-11-17 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 All, I've got a problem with a vendor and I'd like another opinion just to make sure I'm not crazy. The vendor and I have a difference of opinion about how a character should be encoded in an HTTP POST request. The vendor's API officially should ac

[Cluster] Sanity check

2011-04-12 Thread János Löbb
Hi, /Httpd 2.2.17, mod_jk 1.2.31, tomcat 7.0.10, OSX 10.6.5/ Looks like there is something I do not get regarding Tomcat clustering, so I do here a sanity check :-) I have two machines with one tomcat on both. I use one of the machines as reverse proxy. here is the reverse proxy conf from

RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts

2009-05-10 Thread Mark Thomas
> From: "Caldarale, Charles R" > > From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org] > > Subject: Re: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts > > > > It should work. The only potential issue is that a request to > > 123.123.123.111 can still access host2 &

RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts

2009-05-09 Thread Martin Gainty
urni. > From: chuck.caldar...@unisys.com > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 22:23:26 -0500 > Subject: RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts > > > From: Martin Gainty [mailto:mgai...@hotmail.com] > > Subject: RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtua

RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts

2009-05-09 Thread Caldarale, Charles R
> From: Martin Gainty [mailto:mgai...@hotmail.com] > Subject: RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts > I noticed you are using the same port 8443 for 2 different connectors > each connector needs their own IP/port combination ??? The OP's config clearly shows a separate IP

RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts

2009-05-09 Thread Caldarale, Charles R
> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org] > Subject: Re: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts > > It should work. The only potential issue is that a request to > 123.123.123.111 can still access host2 Shouldn't there be elements for the IP addresses for each to i

RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts

2009-05-09 Thread Martin Gainty
t facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni. > Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 19:21:35 +0200 > From: ogn...@etf.bg.ac.rs > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > Subject: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts > > Hi all, >

Re: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts

2009-05-09 Thread Mark Thomas
Ognjen Blagojevic wrote: > Does this look right? It should work. The only potential issue is that a request to 123.123.123.111 can still access host2 (although they will get a warning about certificate validity). It would require playing with name resolution (eg local hosts file) to do this. Mark

Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts

2009-05-09 Thread Ognjen Blagojevic
Hi all, I just configured Tomcat 6.0.18 (over CentOS 5.3 and Java 1.6.0u13) to work with two virtual hosts over https, and wanted to check is this the proper configuration: two https connectors (bounded to the IPs) with two keystores, two Host elements, all inside one Service element. Here i