Ignacio J. Ortega wrote: >>De: Remy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Enviado el: 29 de septiembre de 2002 19:32 >> >>-1 for this unless you explain. The idea was to redirect to >>the default >>port for the protocol. Bill can probably give additional information >>(ignore the -1 if he agrees with the change). >> > > > Ok, no problem, i feel this code like a swarm :)), but i think that in > any case to get the secure flag from the connector is a nonsense in > ajp13, in addition the flag is never setted in the connector so i doubt > redirections in SSL had worked anytime before with HTTP11, i reviewed > the code at the HTTP1Processor and it sets the scheme and port prior to > that point, just like ajp13 does, so shouldnt have any problems.. But > who knows, waiting for Bill..
Well, that particular part of the code was very tricky to get right, so the change is dangerous by itself. I don't have time to look much into it (I'll be away for 3 days; someone please handle bugzilla during that time ;-)). I think we should implement proxyPort and proxyHost if it doesn't work. That's supposed to be there, and would solve the problem I think, so it's better than trying to change working code. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
