https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #13 from Mark Thomas ---
Added to 8.5.x for 8.5.44 onwards.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: de
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
Ognjen Blagojevic changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29924|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
Ognjen Blagojevic changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29921|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #9 from Konstantin Kolinko ---
> IPv6UtilsTest extends TestCase
Trunk uses junit4-style tests.
Checkstyle there is configured that junit3 ones will not pass validation.
(Enabling checkstyle is documented in BUILDING.txt)
--
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
Ognjen Blagojevic changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|Catalina|Catalina
Product|To
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
Ognjen Blagojevic changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27312|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #7 from Ognjen Blagojevic ---
Sebb,
I will fix problems you noticed, and upload new patch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #6 from Sebb ---
Also mayBeIPv6Address does not recognise IPv6 scoped addresses (%scope) or IPv4
mapped addresses (e.g. :::d.d.d.d).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
--
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #5 from Sebb ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The private method mayBeIPv6Address counts colons, but fails to check the
> value.
Which means that abcdef:80 is treated as an IPv6 address, and results in a call
to DNS to resolve th
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #4 from Sebb ---
The private method mayBeIPv6Address counts colons, but fails to check the
value.
Also, there's no need to continue checking characters once an invalid char has
been found.
--
You are receiving this mail becau
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #3 from Sebb ---
Minor nit: the tests use "assertTrue(result.equals(expected))" throughout.
This will detect errors, but won't show what any detail if anything goes wrong.
It would be better to use "assertEquals(expected, resul
Hi devs,
Is anyone interested to review the patch for bug 51497 (Use canonical
IPv6 text representation in logs) [1]?
It modifies IPv6 textual representation to be aligned with usual
practice on Linux, Windows, HTTPD, and recommendations from RFC 5952.
Regards,
Ognjen
[1] https
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #2 from Ognjen Blagojevic
2011-07-25 14:11:54 UTC ---
Created attachment 27312
--> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27312
Adds RFC 5952 canonical IPv6 representation to AccessLogValve.
Here is the propose
On 11.7.2011 20:57, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
I wonder how Apache HTTPD server handles IP6 addresses.
Out-of-the-box, without any specific configuration, my httpd 2.2.3
installation on CentOS 5.6, seems to use canonized text representation.
Here is the log excerpt, slightly obfuscated:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
--- Comment #1 from Konstantin Kolinko 2011-07-11
19:32:48 UTC ---
Discussion on dev@, 2011-07-11:
http://tomcat.markmail.org/thread/jwysfldcsmulkytb
http://marc.info/?t=13104034012&r=1&w=2
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache
2011/7/11 Ognjen Blagojevic :
>
>> (or provide a configuration option).
>
> That is also possibility. What would be good place to configure:
>
> 1. AccessLogValve XML parameter?
AccessLovValve property
(and thus it automatically becomes settable through XML, and after
additional configuration thr
Konstantin,
1. One should really ask system administrators what they prefer
What would be the right place to do that? User list, maybe? I assume at
least some of Tomcat developers are also involved in system
administration, so I hope they will state their opinion here.
(or provide a conf
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51497
Bug #: 51497
Summary: Use canonical IPv6 text representation in logs
Product: Tomcat 7
Version: trunk
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity
2011/7/11 Ognjen Blagojevic :
> Hi,
>
> In AccessLogValve and on other places where IPv6 address is logged or
> printed, it would bi good if Tomcat would use canonical IPv6 format as
> described in RFC 5952 [1] (especially note section "3.2.2. Logging"), e.g:
>
> 1. instead of logging 2001:4000:0:5
Hi,
In AccessLogValve and on other places where IPv6 address is logged or
printed, it would bi good if Tomcat would use canonical IPv6 format as
described in RFC 5952 [1] (especially note section "3.2.2. Logging"), e.g:
1. instead of logging 2001:4000:0:5:0:0:0:66, it should log
2001:4000:0:
21 matches
Mail list logo
