Code more, worry less . Sockets are fun. Enjoy Randall DuCharme (Radio *AD5GB*) Powered by Open Source software.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2025, 17:07 Masakazu Kitajo <mas...@apache.org> wrote: > I am not sure if I understand your question, here's the reasons for > introducing a new scheme for ATS remap rules: > > I have a use case that needs to distinguish requests received on an IP > interface and ones received on a Unix Domain Socket. Having different remap > rules for those two allows me to use different remap plugin settings. Does > that make sense? > > Unix Domain Socket is different from one for TCP/IP. There isn't a port > number for it. As far as I know, there is no standardized way to indicate > the use of Unix Domain Socket, and I think the scheme portion is the only > field that we can use without violating RFC 3986. Although the new scheme > "http+uds" is not standardized, external libraries for parsing/generating > URLs should be able to handle it. > > I hope these answers your questions. > > Thanks, > Masakazu > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 2:24 PM Randy DuCharme <radio.ad...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > 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 > > >> > > > > > >
