-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
André,
On 11/22/16 5:51 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote:
> So now, considering that such a thing would seem to have overall
> an overwhelming positive effect and no negative effect that we can
> think of, how would one go about proposing it ? For o
On 21.11.2016 18:09, Christopher Schultz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
André,
:)
On 11/19/16 12:31 PM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote:
With respect, this is not only "André's problem".
Agreed. I apologize if it seemed like I was suggesting that you are
the only one c
On 11/21/2016 9:09 AM, Christopher Schultz wrote:
André,
:)
Cute, very cute.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
André,
:)
On 11/19/16 12:31 PM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote:
> With respect, this is not only "André's problem".
Agreed. I apologize if it seemed like I was suggesting that you are
the only one complaining.
> I would also posit that this being
On 18.11.2016 20:27, Christopher Schultz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Konstantin,
On 11/18/16 2:10 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
One more authority, that I forgot to mention in my mail: IANA
registry of mime types
Registry:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-type
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Konstantin,
On 11/18/16 2:10 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
> One more authority, that I forgot to mention in my mail: IANA
> registry of mime types
>
> Registry:
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml
>
> Registration en
2016-11-18 19:02 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz :
> André,
>
> On 11/18/16 3:50 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote:
>> On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote:
>>> Since UTF-8 is supposed to be the "official" character encoding,
>>
>> Now where is that specified ? As far as I know, the default
On 18.11.2016 17:02, Christopher Schultz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
André,
On 11/18/16 3:50 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote:
On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote:
Since UTF-8 is supposed to be the "official" character encoding,
Now where is that specif
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
André,
On 11/18/16 3:50 AM, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote:
> On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote:
>> Since UTF-8 is supposed to be the "official" character encoding,
>
> Now where is that specified ? As far as I know, the default
> chars
On 18.11.2016 05:56, Christopher Schultz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Konstantin,
On 11/17/16 4:58 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2016-11-17 17:21 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz
:
All,
I've got a problem with a vendor and I'd like another opinion
just to make sure I'm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Konstantin,
On 11/17/16 4:58 PM, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
> 2016-11-17 17:21 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz
> :
>> All,
>>
>> I've got a problem with a vendor and I'd like another opinion
>> just to make sure I'm not crazy. The vendor and I have a
2016-11-17 17:21 GMT+03:00 Christopher Schultz :
> All,
>
> I've got a problem with a vendor and I'd like another opinion just to
> make sure I'm not crazy. The vendor and I have a difference of opinion
> about how a character should be encoded in an HTTP POST request.
>
> The vendor's API officia
> From: "Caldarale, Charles R"
> > From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org]
> > Subject: Re: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts
> >
> > It should work. The only potential issue is that a request to
> > 123.123.123.111 can still access host2
&
urni.
> From: chuck.caldar...@unisys.com
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 22:23:26 -0500
> Subject: RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts
>
> > From: Martin Gainty [mailto:mgai...@hotmail.com]
> > Subject: RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtua
> From: Martin Gainty [mailto:mgai...@hotmail.com]
> Subject: RE: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts
> I noticed you are using the same port 8443 for 2 different connectors
> each connector needs their own IP/port combination
??? The OP's config clearly shows a separate IP
> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org]
> Subject: Re: Sanity check: Multiple SSL virtual hosts
>
> It should work. The only potential issue is that a request to
> 123.123.123.111 can still access host2
Shouldn't there be elements for the IP addresses for each to
i
I noticed you are using the same port 8443 for 2 different connectors
each connector needs their own IP/port combination
Martin Gainty
__
Disclaimer and Confidentiality/Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de
déni et de confidentialité
This mes
Ognjen Blagojevic wrote:
> Does this look right?
It should work. The only potential issue is that a request to
123.123.123.111 can still access host2 (although they will get a warning
about certificate validity). It would require playing with name
resolution (eg local hosts file) to do this.
Mark
18 matches
Mail list logo
