-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Leon,
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
| http://host:8000/theApp vs http://host:8080/theApp or whatever ports
| he uses? :-)
Oh, right. Duh!
Yeah... I think he's kinda screwed.
- -chris
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: U
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Christopher Schultz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Zsolt,
>
> Zsolt Koppany wrote:
> | Our customer has two tomcats because one instance is the production
> version
> | of our application and the second one is a test
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Zsolt,
Zsolt Koppany wrote:
| Our customer has two tomcats because one instance is the production
version
| of our application and the second one is a test instance of the new
version
| of the same application. Because of that the context-pathes are
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Pid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
The problem is that the TC1 sets a value of JSESSIONID that does not
exist in TC2.
Go back and reread the original post. There's only one instance of Tomcat, but ther
June 19, 2008 10:08 PM
>> To: Tomcat Users List
>> Subject: Re: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
>>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Zsolt,
>>
>> Zsolt Koppany wrote:
>> | How can we make tomcat-5.5.25 to store also
; From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 10:08 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Zsolt,
>
> Zsolt Koppany wrote:
&
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Zsolt,
Zsolt Koppany wrote:
| How can we make tomcat-5.5.25 to store also port into JSESSIONID?
You can't really do that, unless you want to hack-up TC's source.
What you could do is deploy your applications under different context
names, instead o
> From: Leon Rosenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
>
> of course it would since there will be two different cookies with
> different pathes referring to both different sessions.
The webapps could choose to generate their own coo
> From: Pid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
>
> The problem is that the TC1 sets a value of JSESSIONID that does not
> exist in TC2.
Go back and reread the original post. There's only one instance of Tomcat, but
there are t
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:09 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> So now that it is settled that different names for the cookies /would/ solve
> the problem, is that a possibility in Tomcat ?
> Is it possible for one application to "influence" the name of it's session
> cookie, so tha
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Pid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
André Warnier wrote:
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now, maybe the issue is whether the session of one application can or
cannot
be valid
Pid wrote:
André Warnier wrote:
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now, maybe the issue is whether the session of one application can
or cannot
be valid for the other. If they just shared a session (and a
cookie), then
there
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Pid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> André Warnier wrote:
>>
>>
>> Leon Rosenberg wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
Now, maybe the issue is whether the session of one application can or
cannot
be
André Warnier wrote:
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now, maybe the issue is whether the session of one application can or
cannot
be valid for the other. If they just shared a session (and a
cookie), then
there would be harmo
but the path of the cookie. IMHO the path of the cookie is the webapp
context -> /webappname
Leon.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:12 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Leon Rosenberg wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Now, ma
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Now, maybe the issue is whether the session of one application can or cannot
be valid for the other. If they just shared a session (and a cookie), then
there would be harmony again.
Or the OP ju
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, André Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now, maybe the issue is whether the session of one application can or cannot
> be valid for the other. If they just shared a session (and a cookie), then
> there would be harmony again.
Or the OP just renames one of his
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Zsolt Koppany [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
we have two web applications running on the same host (with
the same tomcat) but on DIFFERENT ports.
For curiosity's sake, why are you doing that?
Buf, if one tomcat appli
> From: Zsolt Koppany [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
>
> we have two web applications running on the same host (with
> the same tomcat) but on DIFFERENT ports.
For curiosity's sake, why are you doing that?
> Buf, if one tomcat application refers on URL of
No,
they (must) use the same IP address.
Zsolt
> -Original Message-
> From: Pid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 2:45 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: JSESSIONID doesn't contain the port
>
> Zsolt Koppany wrote:
>
Zsolt Koppany wrote:
Hi,
we have two web applications running on the same host (with the same tomcat)
but on DIFFERENT ports.
Buf, if one tomcat application refers on URL of the second application the
browser (FF-2.0.0.14 IE-6) get a NEW a new JSESSIONID thus the browser
looses its session-id t
21 matches
Mail list logo
