> Also, possibly, somewhere between Tomcat 7.0.14 and 7.0.69, the AJP Connector
> code in Tomcat has been modified, perhaps > to reject POST's with no content.
> (In an intended or unintended way; after all, POSTs with no content aren't
> exactly your standard thing, and could even be
> forbidde
On 28.03.2017 18:06, Scott, Derric T wrote:
On this list, it is preferred to not top-post, ...
No problem.
There are 2 different modules in Apache httpd which can be used for this :
mod_jk and mod_proxy_ajp.
Which one are you using, and can you give us a version?
OK... I inherited this,
> On this list, it is preferred to not top-post, ...
No problem.
> There are 2 different modules in Apache httpd which can be used for this :
> mod_jk and mod_proxy_ajp.
> Which one are you using, and can you give us a version?
OK... I inherited this, so don't know much about it ... but I don
...@ice-sa.com]
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 4:11 PM
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question on FORM POST processing via AJP1.3 in tomcat 1.0.69,
changed from 1.014.
On 27.03.2017 23:03, Scott, Derric T wrote:
Hello:
A question, perhaps a bug...
I inherited a large application that has
]
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 4:11 PM
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question on FORM POST processing via AJP1.3 in tomcat 1.0.69,
changed from 1.014.
On 27.03.2017 23:03, Scott, Derric T wrote:
> Hello:
>
> A question, perhaps a bug...
>
> I inherited a large application
2017-03-28 1:04 GMT+03:00 Olaf Kock :
>
>
> Am 27.03.2017 um 23:11 schrieb André Warnier (tomcat):
>> On 27.03.2017 23:03, Scott, Derric T wrote:
>>> I ran into a snag and finally identified the culprit. The tomcat on
>>> the backend went from 1.0.14 to 1.0.69.
>> As far as I know, there exists no
Am 27.03.2017 um 23:11 schrieb André Warnier (tomcat):
> On 27.03.2017 23:03, Scott, Derric T wrote:
>> I ran into a snag and finally identified the culprit. The tomcat on
>> the backend went from 1.0.14 to 1.0.69.
> As far as I know, there exists no such Tomcat version. Where did you
> get this
2017-03-28 0:03 GMT+03:00 Scott, Derric T :
> Hello:
>
> A question, perhaps a bug...
>
> I inherited a large application that has Apache in front, tomcat in back via
> AJP1.3. I am moving everything to
> "new" verisons. A new RedHat OS, newest tomcat RPM (7.0.69), etc.
>
> I ran into a snag an
On 27.03.2017 23:03, Scott, Derric T wrote:
Hello:
A question, perhaps a bug...
I inherited a large application that has Apache in front, tomcat in back via
AJP1.3. I am moving everything to
"new" verisons. A new RedHat OS, newest tomcat RPM (7.0.69), etc.
I ran into a snag and finally ide
Hello:
A question, perhaps a bug...
I inherited a large application that has Apache in front, tomcat in back via
AJP1.3. I am moving everything to
"new" verisons. A new RedHat OS, newest tomcat RPM (7.0.69), etc.
I ran into a snag and finally identified the culprit. The tomcat on the
backe
10 matches
Mail list logo
