>> I think ajp is handling the missing content length case OK, except we
>> might need to send an initial body chunk even if contentlength is not
>> specified.
>>
>> I was hoping to get it in tc 3.3 since tc is not quite doing what one
>> would expect from reading the spec. How about I post a diff
>for review
>> and we go from there?
>
>What about this: we do the change in facade ( if Larry is +1
>on this !),
>since they are clearly breaking the spec: -1 means unknown
>length, not no
>content. It should be a simple change, we just must make sure
>we check all
>places where ContentLength is used and fix it everywhere.
>
>I think Ajp13 connector can also be easily fixed.
>
>For C side - I would sugest you do it in j-t-c. The code there has few
>other enhancements, including the very nice configure, and can be used
>instead of the native in the main branch. Also, if something bigger is
>needed in the java side of the connector - I would use ajp14.
Warning, people to not change anything in ajp13 protocol.
We must maintain compatibility with TC 3.2.x !!!
If you need to upgrade the protocol, please consider playing
with ajp14 in j-t-c :)
