Kevan Miller wrote:
I've also demonstrated that Tomcat's behavior for
bodiless HTTP 1.1 POST Requests is terrible (Tomcat will still attempt
to read a message body and will not send a Response until the Socket
Read times out).
Sure, that was a great demonstration. I will not sleep until th
Responses inline...
On Dec 24, 2005, at 4:10 AM, Remy Maucherat wrote:
Kevan Miller wrote:
Bill, Bill, and Remy -- thanks for your help. I've raised bug
38030 --
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38030
- I don't read bugzilla
Certainly your prerogative. I don't care for b
Kevan Miller wrote:
Bill, Bill, and Remy -- thanks for your help. I've raised bug 38030 --
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38030
- I don't read bugzilla
- it is not a bug (the request is invalid)
So please close your report.
FYI, I tested TC behavior with an HTTP 1.1 POST wi
Bill, Bill, and Remy -- thanks for your help. I've raised bug 38030 --
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38030
FYI, I tested TC behavior with an HTTP 1.1 POST without a message body and
no content-length. It worked, properly. However, I noticed an 8 second delay
between request and
Bill Barker wrote:
"Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Nope, that's incorrect.
From RFC2616, the official HTTP standard definition:
The presence of a message-body in a request is signaled by the
inclus
"Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Bill Barker wrote:
>> Tomcat handles it much the same way for for a 404 ;-).
>>
>> However, I'm guessing that Httpd sets up an EOS-only bucket-brigade (but
>> am not interested enough to look it up :), so that if the
Bill Barker wrote:
Tomcat handles it much the same way for for a 404 ;-).
However, I'm guessing that Httpd sets up an EOS-only bucket-brigade (but am
not interested enough to look it up :), so that if the target existed and
tried to read the body they would just get EOS.
Given that the reque
"Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>> Bill Stoddard wrote:
>>
>>> Nope, that's incorrect.
>>> From RFC2616, the official HTTP standard definition:
>>>
>>>The presence of a message-body in a request is signaled by the
>>>inc
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Nope, that's incorrect.
From RFC2616, the official HTTP standard definition:
The presence of a message-body in a request is signaled by the
inclusion of a Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header field in
the request's message-headers.
A
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Nope, that's incorrect.
From RFC2616, the official HTTP standard definition:
The presence of a message-body in a request is signaled by the
inclusion of a Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header field in
the request's message-headers.
A bodyless POST request w/
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Bill Barker wrote:
AFAICT, this code is assuming that there will always be a message
body in the POST Request. However, this is not necessarily the case
(and is certainly not true for the problem at hand). Eventually,
SocketInputStream.read() is called from within
o.a
"Kevan Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Dec 22, 2005, at 4:52 AM, Remy Maucherat wrote:
>
>> Bill Barker wrote:
AFAICT, this code is assuming that there will always be a message
body in the POST Request. However, this is not necessarily the c
On Dec 22, 2005, at 4:52 AM, Remy Maucherat wrote:
Bill Barker wrote:
AFAICT, this code is assuming that there will always be a
message body in the POST Request. However, this is not
necessarily the case (and is certainly not true for the problem
at hand). Eventually, SocketInputStream.
Bill Barker wrote:
AFAICT, this code is assuming that there will always be a message body in
the POST Request. However, this is not necessarily the case (and is
certainly not true for the problem at hand). Eventually,
SocketInputStream.read() is called from within
o.a.coyote.http11.InternalR
"Kevan Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The Geronimo project has encountered a TCK issue running with Tomcat
> 5.5.12. We'd appreciate your help with the problem.
>
I hope that you know that you've just violated your NDA by posting this on a
public list :).
The Geronimo project has encountered a TCK issue running with Tomcat
5.5.12. We'd appreciate your help with the problem.
In the test, a POST Request without a message body is being received
and a 403 "The request body was too large to be cached during the
authentication process" is being im
16 matches
Mail list logo
