Ian wrote:
> I think we had philosophical differences about whether to read the
> headers in attributes, or rewrite the environment, and I was on the rewrite
> side.  And... wasn't it X-Forwarded-Server?

Sorry, didn't mean to pick on you, Ian ;)

I'm all for rewriting the environ.  If I remember right, my version of the code
required no configuration, but could not handle being "mounted" in a
subdirectory whereas the existing code was the opposite.  Either way, I wish it
were fixed by default.  This bug has chased me through two companies ;)

I'd be happy even it Routes automatically respected X_FORWARDED_FOR or
something.

Jonathan wrote:
> The middleware I use under modperl works like this:
>
> Port 80 proxy-
>    Sets X-Forwarded-For to REMOTE_ADDR
>    Sets X-Forwarded-For-Lan to LAN_SECRET
>    Sets REMOTE_ADDR to the lan id / 127.0.0.1
>
> ModPerl 'middleware'
>    Requires X-Forwarded-For headers to have:
>       REMOTE_ADDR of specifc lan ips
>       X-Forwarded-For-Lan  with correct lan secret
>    If those qualifications are met, then the X-Forwarded-For becomes
> REMOTE_ADDR.  If they do not, the request is rejected.

Clever ;)

By the way, I'm confused.  What *is* the standard answer to this
question for Pylons?

-jj

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to