APIs can be anything. There's hundreds of ports available. Why standardize the unstandard?
Randall DuCharme (Radio *AD5GB*) Powered by Open Source software. On Wed, Aug 20, 2025, 15:22 Randy DuCharme <radio.ad...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why? > > Randall DuCharme (Radio *AD5GB*) > Powered by Open Source software. > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025, 15:21 Masakazu Kitajo <mas...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I recently proposed a way to support remap rules that only match with >> requests that are made on Unix Domain Socket, and I'd like to request for >> comments. >> https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/12338 >> >> My proposal is to introduce a special URL scheme "http+uds" (and >> https+uds) >> and use it with map_with_recv_port keyword (the keyword is uncommon but >> not >> new). >> >> Example: >> map_with_recv_port http+uds://service.example http://origin.example/ >> >> I originally thought of using a special port number/string instead of the >> new scheme, but it didn't seem practical to me because it'd require a lot >> of changes in code. In a nutshell, having characters at the port portion >> of >> a URL is not allowed by the standard, and we'd have to change the URL >> parser and also the data structure, which affects cache data. With that >> said, that is a difficulty in the implementation. I'd appreciate and >> respect comments from users as well. >> >> Thanks, >> Masakazu >> >