[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-431?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13495493#comment-13495493
]
Benoit Chesneau commented on COUCHDB-431:
-----------------------------------------
[~janl] I will have a look on the expose header tonight
So Yes currently we are only checking against the Host. Do we want to have a
different configuration depending on the port. I wanted to skip the need to
check the Host an the port here , but if we do that then I would suggest to
actually reuse the vhost module code which default to couchdb ports if none or
* is given. If we do that maybe while we are here we could introduce a vhost
section instead of having only cors.
Ie:
[vhost:host:port]
path = /blah path
** cors config
But it may be too late to do that.
This to reuse the code and probably caching this vhost config instead of having
to do twice the job (for cors & vhost).
3. This is what we already do. The config is associated to an Host, and we
check against the Host given in the header to get it.
> cors - aka Cross-Origin Resource Sharing support
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-431
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-431
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: HTTP Interface
> Affects Versions: 0.9
> Reporter: James Burke
> Assignee: Benoit Chesneau
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 1.3
>
> Attachments: 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431-2.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> 0001-cors-support.-should-fix-COUCHDB-431.patch,
> A_0001-Generalize-computing-the-appropriate-headers-for-any.patch,
> A_0002-Send-server-headers-for-externals-responses.patch,
> A_0003-Usably-correct-w3c-CORS-headers-for-valid-requests.patch,
> A_0004-Respond-to-CORS-preflight-checks-HTTP-OPTIONS.patch,
> check_method_cors.patch, cors.html, cors_test.html, test_cors2-1.tgz,
> test_cors2.tgz
>
>
> Historically, browsers have been restricted to making XMLHttpRequests (XHRs)
> to the same origin (domain) as the web page making the request. However, the
> latest browsers now support cross-domain requests by implementing the Access
> Control spec from the W3C:
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/
> In order to keep older servers safe that assume browsers only do same-domain
> requests, the Access Control spec requires the server to opt-in to allow
> cross domain requests by the use of special HTTP headers and supporting some
> "pre-flight" HTTP calls.
> Why should CouchDB support this: in larger, high traffic site, it is common
> to serve the static UI files from a separate, differently scaled server
> complex than the data access/API server layer. Also, there are some API
> services that are meant to be centrally hosted, but allow API consumers to
> use the API from different domains. In these cases, the UI in the browser
> would need to do cross domain requests to access CouchDB servers that act as
> the API/data access server layer.
> JSONP is not enough in these cases since it is limited to GET requests, so no
> POSTing or PUTing of documents.
> Some information from Firefox's perspective (functionality available as of
> Firefox 3.5):
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTTP_access_control
> And information on Safari/Webkit (functionality in latest WebKit and Safari
> 4):
> http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/AppleApplications/Conceptual/SafariJSProgTopics/Articles/XHR.html
> IE 8 also uses the Access Control spec, but the requests have to go through
> their XDomainRequest object (XDR):
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc288060%28VS.85%29.aspx
> and I thought IE8 only allowed GET or POST requests through their XDR.
> But as far as CouchDB is concerned, implementing the Access Control headers
> should be enough, and hopefully IE 9 will allow normal xdomain requests via
> XHR.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
