tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Schultz <>
Subject Re: I don't understand a recent change released in Tomcat 7.0.70
Date Fri, 24 Jun 2016 20:50:45 GMT
Hash: SHA256


Okay, one last time before I start ignoring you. We really are trying
to be helpful. But nobody knows why who are so exercised about this.

You haven't:

a) Clearly explained what you want to do (redirect which requests?
with what response code? in what cases?)
b) Told us what you've tried before (be specific)
c) Explained what in the world your issue has to do with the commit
you have been talking about that first appeared in 7.0.70


On 6/24/16 1:19 PM, Lyallex wrote:
> On 24 June 2016 at 16:45, Christopher Schultz 
> <> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
> <snip>
>> 3. You can redirect anything yourself if you want to. The only
>> reason for the Realm option was because Tomcat itself is issuing
>> this particular redirect based upon an authentication situation
>> (as defined by the servlet specification).
>> 4. If you want "easy" redirection from http -> https and you
>> don't want to write the 5-line Filter to do it for you, use
>> url-rewrite and set up a rule that redirects all http:// requests
>> to https:// URLs.
> If you really understood the issue you wouldn't make such a lame
> observation it has nothing to do with not being able to redirect,
> it is to do with the *response code* returned by tomcat when the
> redirect occurs.

I understand the relevant issues perfectly. What I don't understand is
why the response code for the Realm is even an issue for you. From
your description, you don't have or need a Realm. You have just
decided that you want to redirect requests using the http:// scheme to
using the https:// scheme, which is perfectly reasonable.

> I have tried a number of things to try and solve this issue using 
> Servlet Filters but I just can't seem to get the timing right.

Okay. What did you actually try. Show some code and/or configuration.

> The Tuckey UrlRewriteFilter does not make the slightest bit of
> difference. I know this because I tried it. Did you?

I have user url-rewrite to great effect in various situations.

>> And seriously, calm down.
> And seriously, try to understand the issue before criticizing.
> You really are a delicate lot aren't you, the slightest suggestion 
> that you might not be the geniuses you obviously think you and your
> fragile egos crumple and you get all defensive. I've seen it so
> many times in 20+ years as a developer/software engineer that I 
> shouldn't be surprised but I still am.

Nobody is getting defensive, and this isn't about ego. We are trying
to help you and you are just flying off the handle. "THIS CHANGE MAKES
NO SENSE TO ME" and then you talk about how you haven't been able to
make your own code redirect requests. Total non-sequitur IMO.

(In your initial post, you did prepare everyone for a lot of (quite
unnecessary) shouting. I have no idea why shouting would even be
necessary. Did you ever get that sleep you needed?)

I'm happy to help with your root issue... which seems to have nothing
to do with BZ 59399.

>> You completely lost your mind over a new configuration option
>> that you misunderstood.
> Oh the irony

- -chris
Comment: GPGTools -
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message