Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jetty-users] Premature dispatch creates null value body argument when incoming POST is dispatched before body arrives?

Hi Olivier,

Thanks a lot - that’ll be the missing link.  For now, I’m OK working with 9.3.x to figure out where things are going so fundamentally off the rails.  There’s got to be something painfully obvious I’m missing somehow.  Greg Wilkins just pointed out they test their builds sending requests as little as 1 byte at a time so it can’t be as simple as 1-vs-2 packets.  There’s probably something in how the cpprest client stubs are generating the request, but darned if I can see it.

As I just wrote to Greg,

I believe the call is being dispatched as soon as the headers arrive because in the ‘tcpdump’ trace I see only the headers go out and immediately the response comes back (with an error).  See below for a (lightly censored) example out of the trace:

16:22:30.919766 IP > Flags [P.], seq 1:207, ack 1, win 342, options [nop,nop,TS val 3457687594 ecr 3457687594], length 206: HTTP: PUT /VMware-XXX/XXX-backend/1.0/hosts HTTP/1.1
0x0000:  4500 0102 09aa 4000 4006 ea65 0a14 98df  E.....@.@..e....
0x0010:  0a14 98df c062 1f90 2b24 0906 cfec aed1  .....b..+$......
0x0020:  8018 0156 46db 0000 0101 080a ce18 202a  ...VF..........*
0x0030:  ce18 202a 5055 5420 2f56 4d77 6172 652d  ...*PUT./VMware-
0x0040:  5858 582f 5858 582d 6261 636b 656e 642f  XXX/XXX-backend/
0x0050:  312e 302f 686f 7374 7320 4854 5450 2f31  1.0/hosts.HTTP/1
0x0060:  2e31 0d0a 486f 7374 3a20 7064 6972 6b73  .1..Host:.pdirks
0x0070:  2d64 6576 2d6c 696e 7578 2e65 6e67 2e76  -dev-linux.eng.v
0x0080:  6d77 6172 652e 636f 6d3a 3830 3830 0d0a
0x0090:  4163 6365 7074 3a61 7070 6c69 6361 7469  Accept:applicati
0x00a0:  6f6e 2f6a 736f 6e0d 0a43 6f6e 7465 6e74  on/json..Content
0x00b0:  2d4c 656e 6774 683a 3139 0d0a 436f 6e74  -Length:19..Cont
0x00c0:  656e 742d 5479 7065 3a61 7070 6c69 6361  ent-Type:applica
0x00d0:  7469 6f6e 2f6a 736f 6e0d 0a55 7365 722d  tion/json..User-
0x00e0:  4167 656e 743a 0d0a 436f 6e6e 6563 7469  Agent:..Connecti
0x00f0:  6f6e 3a20 4b65 6570 2d41 6c69 7665 0d0a  on:.Keep-Alive..
0x0100:  0d0a                                     ..
16:22:30.923503 IP > Flags [P.], seq 1:248, ack 226, win 350, options [nop,nop,TS val 3457687598 ecr 3457687594], length 247: HTTP: HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
0x0000:  4500 012b ae7e 4000 4006 4568 0a14 98df  E..+.~@.@.Eh....
0x0010:  0a14 98df 1f90 c062 cfec aed1 2b24 09e7  .......b....+$..
0x0020:  8018 015e 4704 0000 0101 080a ce18 202e  ...^G...........
0x0030:  ce18 202a 4854 5450 2f31 2e31 2034 3030  ...*HTTP/1.1.400
0x0040:  2042 6164 2052 6571 7565 7374 0d0a 4461  .Bad.Request..Da
0x0050:  7465 3a20 5375 6e2c 2032 3120 4170 7220  te:.Sun,.21.Apr.
0x0060:  3230 3139 2032 333a 3232 3a33 3020 474d  2019.23:22:30.GM
0x0070:  540d 0a41 6363 6573 732d 436f 6e74 726f  T..Access-Contro
0x0080:  6c2d 416c 6c6f 772d 4f72 6967 696e 3a20  l-Allow-Origin:.
0x0090:  2a0d 0a41 6363 6573 732d 436f 6e74 726f  *..Access-Contro
0x00a0:  6c2d 416c 6c6f 772d 4d65 7468 6f64 733a  l-Allow-Methods:
0x00b0:  2047 4554 2c20 504f 5354 2c20 4445 4c45  .GET,.POST,.DELE
0x00c0:  5445 2c20 5055 540d 0a41 6363 6573 732d  TE,.PUT..Access-
0x00d0:  436f 6e74 726f 6c2d 416c 6c6f 772d 4865  Control-Allow-He
0x00e0:  6164 6572 733a 2043 6f6e 7465 6e74 2d54  aders:.Content-T
0x00f0:  7970 650d 0a43 6f6e 7465 6e74 2d4c 656e  ype..Content-Len
0x0100:  6774 683a 2030 0d0a 5365 7276 6572 3a20  gth:.0..Server:.
0x0110:  4a65 7474 7928 392e 332e 3236 2e76 3230  Jetty(9.3.26.v20
0x0120:  3139 3034 3033 290d 0a0d 0a              190403)....

Interestingly, I see a “PUSH” flag set on the “PUT” packet and I don’t even see the rest of the body in another packet this time, so that suggests the difference is not just 1 vs. 2 packets but some other issue generating a properly formatted body (although it could also be the server dropping the connection before the client gets around to sending it).  Note, though, that the header has “Content-Length:19” which is exactly what I would expect for the length of a properly formatted “{“host-id”:"goofy”}” packet ?

FWIW I don’t get as far as a NPE - I have some logging that logs when a null pointer comes in to the server stub and it decides to reject the call with 400 error (“BAD REQUEST”) so I’m 100% sure my stub is, in fact, being called with a null pointer for the body parameter, whereas with Postman it works as expected, comes in with a non-null pointer, and sees what it expects to see in the body parameter and completes normally.

I appreciate the point-out on “supportedPackagings", though - I’ll let you know when I get a chance to work my way up to 9.4.x.


On Apr 21, 2019, at 4:45 PM, Olivier Lamy <olamy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Patrick,
see inline.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 5:14 PM Patrick Dirks <pdirks@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Joakim,

On Apr 20, 2019, at 9:36 PM, Joakim Erdfelt <joakim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

9.2.9 is rather old, even for the EOL 9.2.x series.
Consider using 9.2.28.v20190418.
Or if you want latest stable release, use 9.4.17.v20190418 

Yes, I just noticed on the Jetty web site that 9.2.x was, in fact, EOL.  I’m not sure how my system ended up with 9.2.9 installed - I believe that was hard-wired in the generated SwaggerHub server stubs.

I’m not sure what incompatibilities I should look out for upgrading to 9.4.x.  Offhand, just changing “jetty-version” in the generated pom.xml to 9.4.17.v20190418 makes “man clean package jetty:run” yields a complaint about the “.jar” format swagger-jaxrs-server that gets built not being supported:

[INFO] <<< jetty-maven-plugin:9.4.17.v20190418:run (default-cli) < test-compile @ swagger-jaxrs-server <<<
[INFO] --- jetty-maven-plugin:9.4.17.v20190418:run (default-cli) @ swagger-jaxrs-server ---
[INFO] Logging initialized @6783ms to org.eclipse.jetty.util.log.Slf4jLog
[INFO] Skipping swagger-jaxrs-server : packaging type [jar] is unsupported
[INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Total time:  5.980 s
[INFO] Finished at: 2019-04-20T23:57:41-07:00
[INFO] ————————————————————————————————————

which wasn’t exactly what I was hoping for :-)
That's something new in 9.4.x ( )
You must add this jetty-maven-plugin configuration:


OTOH, looking back through the Jetty releases I tried the MUCH more recent 9.3.26.v20190403 and THAT seems to suddenly work as expected!  Looks like this may have been an issue cleaned up since 9.2.9 hit the streets!

I think I’m good with 9.3.26.v20190403!  I’ll test some other client stubs and see if this actually completely resolved the problem but it certainly appears to have fixes this issue.

Thanks for the tip!


Joakim Erdfelt / joakim@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 7:13 PM Patrick Dirks <pdirks@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I’m new to Jetty - I'm experimenting with an API on SwaggerHub and I've generated both client-side (cpprest) and server-side (JAX-RS) stubs from the API. My server side is running jetty-9.2.9.v20150224.

When I use a client like Postman, which sends the complete request (headers and body) in a single packet, the server responds as expected. When I use the generated (cpprest) client stubs the request headers come in a first packet and the body in a second packet. The strange part is that, although they re-assemble fine (I can see a valid-looking combined packet in Wireshark), it looks as if the server request is dispatched as soon as the headers arrive, without waiting for the body parameters to arrive (despite the "Content-length" header value)?

As a result the server sees a request that's got a "null" value for the body parameter (even though the parameter is marked as "required"), as if "delayDispatchUntilContent" is false? I've tried adding a "jetty.xml" file that explicitly defaults and sets "delayDispatchUntilContent" to "true" but that doesn't seem to make any difference.  Neither does Swagger 2.0 vs. OpenAPI 3.0 use make any difference.

Any idea what I'm missing here? Any suggestions for a workaround, or a fix?

Thanks in advance!
jetty-users mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
jetty-users mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit"">

jetty-users mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

jetty-users mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit"">

Back to the top