On 14/09/2016 18:41, Edward Burns wrote:
> On 14 September 2016 at 12:15, Edward Burns <edward.burns_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>
> EB> Can someone please give us the TLDR on RFC7239?
>
>>>>>> On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 14:32:22 +1000, Greg Wilkins <gregw_at_webtide.com> said:
>
> GW> Application servers are often deployed behing proxies/load
> GW> balancer/caches/TLS offloaders and other intermediaries.
>
> This is excellent. Thanks.
>
> [...]
>
> GW> I've not given this a great deal of thought regarding API, but I have
> GW> thought about some issues.
>
> [...]
>
> GW> If there is interest in standardizing this, I'll give some more thought to
> GW> an API.
>
> Yes, there is interest, but please don't spend any time on it just yet.
>
> I am preparing a Servlet 4.0 talk for JavaOne next week due to decisions
> that were made that one can logically infer from articles such as [1].
>
> The usual pattern for such talks is to report our progress over the past
> year. Obviously that pattern will not work this time. So, I expect I
> will mention this as a potential area for investigation.
I don't recall a single request for RFC 7239 support from the Tomcat
community. We have plenty of requests (and support) for X-Forwarded-For
and friends.
Mark