Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
What would you call the optional port in the Host header then? If the
server was able to figure that out on its own it would not be necessary.
The explicit port in the Host header is used in case the target port number
is not equal to that of the default protocol port
Oleg,
If I interprete the specs correctly it does not matter on which port the
server actually listens. The request processor may be so "far"
(architecture wise) away from the TCP connection that it does not even
know the port on which the connection came in. Maybe the request even
came in over a pipe and not a TCP socket at all.
In any case the two requests
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: jakarta.apache.org
and
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: jakarta.apache.org:100
issued to the same server instance (running on port 80 for example),
request *different documents*. I admit, this may be sound esoteric and
the second request is not even possible with a normal web browser.
A possible application scenario I can see is static NAT:
Client
|
NAT port 80
|
Apache port 100
In this setup the web server would expect port 100 in the Host header.
But the client would normally send port 80. The client could now use the
"virtual" port 100. Of course such a setup is flawed, but possible.
Odi
PS. Forget about the ProxyPass directive. Maybe it's really a bad example.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
