Sven Köhler wrote: >> 3. On top of regular request/response. Almost everything related with >> auth, pings, discovery, reconfiguration can be implemented by just using >> regular Ajp13 requests - with a special URL. That is by far my favorite >> mechanism. It also has the advantage that it can reuse other parts of >> tomcat - mapper, coyote actions, etc. I strongly believe that most >> features should be implemented at this layer ( regardless of the request >> message or the wire protocol changes ) > > special URLs are by far the best mechanism? > the next simpson-episode should start with bart writing "special urls > are by far the worst mechanism ever" to the board. > > it's working around a missing feature - nothing more, nothing less. > it's the worse method i could imagine. > > your are talking about seomthing like > /_ajp/config > or somethin, right? > what if this URL occurs within the users directory structure? > using illegal URLs like > _ajp/config > could confuse other ajp-implementation that are not aware of such sh*t.
Old ajp implementations will just return the regular 404 or 500 - what else would you want to happen ? To ignore the unknown messages and let the other side believe all is ok ? It can also use a AJP method ( instead of GET ). Again - a regular error message will be returned. And again, the confusion happens only if you use new features with old implementations. I think new features should be explicitedly turned on - or at least you should be able to turn them off if you know you are talking with an old version. IMO this mechanism is far better than bloating the protocol - all experience we had in the last 3 years shows only few people are willing to mess with the C code and the lower layers. Higher level constructs are easier to maintain and debug than wire protocols. Costin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
