Hi Larry, > I am trying to determine if my assumption about ExceptionHandler and StatusHandler not including "" and "" tags, while the others do, is significant. My recent changes to ContextManager.java in tomcat_32 assumed that it was. As a result, ContextManager.handleException() doesn't call res.resetBuffers() if ExceptionHandler is going to be used, to avoid clearing "" and "" tags that may already be present. I also modified handleStatus() to do the same if StatusHandler is going to be used. To be honest - I don't know :-) It's the result of refactoring and trying to preserve existing behavior. For StatusHandler - I think we should have and , initially it had no body ( and I copied from ExceptionHandler ). Exceptions shouldn't happend ( :-) ), and it's a taste decision if you want an error page ( even if the error happened in included fragments) or you want the error displayed in the place of fragment. I think the first option is better ( the fragment may be invisible, etc), errors should be clearly visible. AFAIK the current ( and previous behavior ) used the second option. One reason for keeping the current status - what happen if the error happens after some output was commited ? One thing that I know it's important is making the exception handler configurable to disable stack traces !!! It's very bad for a production site. > Is this assumption valid, or should ExceptionHandler and StatusHandler be including the "" and "" tags too. Was there a reason these tags were omitted? For status it's simple - it should have . I'm +1 with any option you choose for ExceptionHandler. > The main reason I ask is that if optionally calling "res.resetBuffer()" in handleStatus() is correct, I need to update HttpServletResponseFacade.sendError() to call "response.resetBuffer()" itself to insure it gets called as required by the spec. Otherwise, I would have handleStatus() always call "res.resetBuffer()" as it did prior to my change. > I am planning to modify ContextManger.java to enclose the "res.resetBuffer()" in a "try-catch" as suggested by Danno Ferrin in an earlier e-mail. This avoid throwing an unnecessary exception which fouls up the intended response. How I modify it depends on whether the resetBuffer() call should be optional. +1 Costin