"William Barker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > jean-frederic clere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > > > A few issues remain:
> > > > (I) Is portability to JDK 1.1.x desirable/a requirement? Both the
> > > > existing JSSE code and my new code rely upon java.security.cert.*
> > > > which was introduced in JDK 1.2. Both JSSE and PureTLS provide more or
> > > > less complete (less in the case of JSSE) certificate interfaces but
> > > > they're of course different and we need a common interface presented
> > > > to Tomcat. If JDK 1.1.x is a requirement I'll have to add a new
> > > > abstraction layer, which can't inherit from java.security.cert because
> > > > that didn't exist in 1.1. This isn't a problem (Simple Matter of
> > > > Programming) but is only worth doing if necessary.
> > >
> > > With JDK 1.1.x and AJP a null is returned.
> > > With JDK 1.1.x should the CC be returned as a String? (I thought it
> was).
> > It's certainly not in the JSSE code I was porting. That code
> > didn't even compile without JDK 1.2.x.
> >
> > from build.xml:
> >       <exclude name="**/util/net/SSLSocketFactory.java"
> >                unless="jdk12.present"/>
> >
> > In any case, we can do something far more sophisticated than a String
> > if we want to, even with JDK 1.1.x.
> 
> If it wasn't mandated to be a java.security.cert.X509Certificate [] by
> section 5.7 of the servlet spec :).
Well, I suppose that since JDK 1.1.x didn't stop you from putting
classes in java. I could do my own version of 
java.security.cert.X509Certificate. A little gross but perhaps
the best plan. The alternative is to blatantly violate the spec
in 1.1 and just deliver something else.

> > > You have to use request.getAttribute() in the JSPs/servlets.
> > Right, but that doesn't mean that we have to expose the SSLSupport
> > interface. Instead we could break out each individual property
> > we cared about into it's own attribute.
> 
> To be consistant with 2.3 containers, I'd go with individually named
> attributes.
Fine with me. Anyone object to this?

-Ekr

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to