Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-04-06 Thread Anton Ushakov
gt; To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 10:46 AM > Subject: Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem > > > > First I must say you've been extremely helpful, thank you for your > > prompt responses! I hate to

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-04-02 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: "Anton Ushakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 10:46 AM Subject: Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem > First I must say you've been extremely h

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-04-02 Thread Anton Ushakov
anton On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 13:32, Bill Barker wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Anton Ushakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 10:59 PM > Subject: Re: Coyote&

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-04-01 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: "Anton Ushakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 10:59 PM Subject: Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem > Alright, thanks Bill. I hav

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-03-31 Thread Anton Ushakov
? All this IntrospectionUtils business is confusing... On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 18:03, Bill Barker wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Anton Ushakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 4:24

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-03-26 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: "Anton Ushakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 4:24 PM Subject: Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem > Should I make a bug entry for this? I wanted t

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-03-26 Thread Anton Ushakov
Should I make a bug entry for this? I wanted to get someone from the tomcat dev team to see if I was missing something before flagging this as a bug. thank you -anton On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 17:16, Anton Ushakov wrote: > In CoyoteConnector.initialize() there's an assumption that if the > factory

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-03-24 Thread Anton Ushakov
In CoyoteConnector.initialize() there's an assumption that if the factory is an instance of CoyoteServerSocketFactory, it's gonna be SSL, and it sets secure=true. Then in Http11ConnectionHandler.checkSocketFactory() in the Http11Protocol.java, it interprets that "secure" flag as SSL and uses SSLIm

Re: Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-03-24 Thread Jim Hopp
We have a similar need (though for a different reason) and extend CoyoteServerSocketFactory. We're running TC 4.1.29. Here's our Connector element: Works great. -Jim Anton Ushakov wrote: Hello Tomcat Developers! I'm working with Tomcat 4.1.29 and I'd like to use my own Server

Coyote's ServerSocketFactory problem

2004-03-24 Thread Anton Ushakov
Hello Tomcat Developers! I'm working with Tomcat 4.1.29 and I'd like to use my own ServerSocketFactory, as I'm working on a custom implementation of httpg (HTTP over GSSAPI authenticated sockets). This seems impossible by design, which I think may be a bug. Instead of using the deprecated HttpCon