Hi Ashish,
I was certainly thinking of X-Forwarded-Host. I'm not clear on whether this
header includes the original port. Google hasn't shown me much info on how
other people deal with this problem. I did find
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/mod/mod_proxy.html#proxypreservehost
which appears to indicate you can configure apache httpd to not introduce this
problem in the first place.
I can see that directly configuring the host would be useful in some
circumstances, but I think it would be easier in more circumstances to be able
to configure the header name for the original host.
So I guess you are right and directly configuring the host is the best solution
for now. I'll let you know if I can find any more information on this.
thanks!
david jencks
On Feb 10, 2011, at 6:28 AM, Ashish Jain wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I am not sure if we can use the request object. The request
> (org.apache.geronimo.webservices.WebServiceContainer.Request) object gives
> you the address for the remote host which is the address for the proxy
> server, however no information on the port. Another way could have been to
> utilize the header "request.getHeader("X-Forwarded-Host")" but this is not a
> standard header AFAIK. So this option can also to be ruled out. So I think
> modifying the schema is the best way ahead.
>
> Thanks
> Ashish
>
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Ashish Jain <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks David and Jarek. I am investigating on the comment made by David and
> seems to have found some headers which are being appended by HTTP server. I
> will investigate further in this direction to find out if the request object
> can be used to attain this.
>
> Thanks
> Ashish
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:06 AM, David Jencks <[email protected]> wrote:
> Changing the schema like this shouldn't be a problem if its necessary. I'd
> like to understand better why its necessary. Perhaps there's another way.
>
> I thought that the way this was coded was that the host and port from the
> incoming request were stuffed into the wsdl being returned. Doesn't the
> proxy server tell us what the original request was in some way such as a
> request attribute? Could we look for that information and use it if
> available and use the request itself if not?
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Feb 7, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
>
> > Ashish,
> >
> > Modifying the schema (without changing the namespace) is fine as long
> > as you make the new element(s) optional. That at least is what we have
> > done in the past.
> >
> > Jarek
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Ashish Jain <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> When geronimo is front ended with a proxy say Apache HTTP server and a web
> >> service is invoked via this proxy. The auto
> >> generated wsdl will have the soap:address as
> >> http://<g_host>:<g_port>/service_name. Instead it should be
> >> http://<proxy_host>:
> >> <proxy:port>/service_name. The method which takes care of all this is
> >> org.apache.geronimo.axis2.WSDLQueryHandler.writeResponse
> >> . The baseUri attribute in the class has to be modified so that appropriate
> >> soap:address can be written in the wsdl file.
> >>
> >> So as to get this property into geronimo one of the way would be to be able
> >> to specify in geronimo deployment descriptor.
> >> Adding a new attribute may require schema change.
> >>
> >> Is this acceptable? Are there any other alternative ways through which this
> >> can be achieved?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Ashish
> >>
>
>
>
