Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-19 Thread tamouse mailing lists
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 7:43 PM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mar 10, 2012, at 3:53 PM, tamouse mailing lists wrote:
 On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 That's correct, but to access those variables outside of their scope (such 
 as a function) you do via a SuperGlobal, namely $GLOBAL['whatever'].

 As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, 
 if I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.

 I guess I don't know what you mean by globals. I know what globals
 are, but not globals.

 I don't understand your question. I know what questions are, but not your 
 question. :-)

Well, I've been pondering this for a while, and now I'm sure.

 - kill file

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-13 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Mar 12, 2012, at 7:12 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
 ?php
 
 function yes ($a)
 {
 global $x;
 if  ($a)  $x = yes\n;
 }
 
 first (true);
 
 echo $x;
 
 ?
 
 
 but I haven't looked into $GLOBALS enough to know whether using them instead 
 would have saved my bacon.

I'm not sure what would have saved bacon in the above case. I don't see how 
your example would work. I think it contained a typo.

In what I think you were trying to demonstrate, I would just pass $x by 
reference ($x) -- or -- return $x by value. I would not have used a global,

In any event, I seldom use globals anyway. This was more an academic discussion.

Cheers,

tedd

_
tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
http://sperling.com
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-13 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Mar 12, 2012, at 12:04 PM, Daniel Brown wrote:
 On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 14:16, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 This document clearly states that $GLOBALS is a SuperGlobal -- what am I not 
 understanding here?
 
You are understanding it correctly, the only thing that's missing
 is the population.  The variables are defined (set), but not all are
 populated.  $GLOBALS is a superglobal, you're right; globals set from
 userland scripts are not superglobals, but do wind up in the $GLOBALS
 array.  Thus, all superglobals are globals, but not all globals are
 superglobals.

So, it's a question of population timing -- I see.

Additionally, I like the term userland -- I will use it in class. :-)

What would be the opposite term, serverland?

Thanks,

tedd

_
tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
http://sperling.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-13 Thread Matijn Woudt
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mar 12, 2012, at 7:12 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
 ?php

 function yes ($a)
     {
     global $x;
     if  ($a)  $x = yes\n;
     }

 first (true);

 echo $x;

 ?


 but I haven't looked into $GLOBALS enough to know whether using them instead 
 would have saved my bacon.

 I'm not sure what would have saved bacon in the above case. I don't see how 
 your example would work. I think it contained a typo.

 In what I think you were trying to demonstrate, I would just pass $x by 
 reference ($x) -- or -- return $x by value. I would not have used a global,

 In any event, I seldom use globals anyway. This was more an academic 
 discussion.

 Cheers,

 tedd


I would indeed mark it as bad practice using them. I only use them for
debugging purposes. When developing something, you might end up
needing some global variable temporary, and you don't want to pass it
through a few dozen functions before reaching the one where you need
it.

- Matijn

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-13 Thread Stuart Dallas
On 13 Mar 2012, at 15:59, Tedd Sperling wrote:

 In any event, I seldom use globals anyway. This was more an academic 
 discussion.

If you're being academic about it please remember that the way PHP defines 
globals is different to most other languages.

PHP: A variable defined at the top-level scope.

World: A variable that is visible at every scope.

This is an important difference if you ever move from PHP to another language. 
It ultimately also means that only the superglobals are true globals.

The $GLOBALS superglobal contains all variables defined at the top-level scope, 
including $GLOBALS, so $GLOBALS['GLOBALS']['GLOBALS']['GLOBALS']['_SERVER'] is 
a perfectly valid, if daft, way of accessing $_SERVER.

-Stuart

-- 
Stuart Dallas
3ft9 Ltd
http://3ft9.com/

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-13 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Mar 13, 2012, at 12:20 PM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
 On 13 Mar 2012, at 15:59, Tedd Sperling wrote:
 
 In any event, I seldom use globals anyway. This was more an academic 
 discussion.
 -snip-
 It ultimately also means that only the superglobals are true globals.

That was my initial statement in this thread.

After 47 years of programming, I think I'm beginning to get the idea. :-)

As I've said for many years I've learned something new every day of my life -- 
and I'm getting damned tried of it.

Cheers,

tedd

_
tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
http://sperling.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-13 Thread Tim Streater
On 13 Mar 2012 at 15:59, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote: 

 I'm not sure what would have saved bacon in the above case. I don't see how
 your example would work. I think it contained a typo.

 In what I think you were trying to demonstrate, I would just pass $x by
 reference ($x) -- or -- return $x by value. I would not have used a global,

 In any event, I seldom use globals anyway. This was more an academic
 discussion.

As was my example - and yes, it had a typo. Worse, trying it in a shell it 
doesn't exhibit the failure mode I thought I'd had. Never mind.

--
Cheers  --  Tim

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-13 Thread Donovan Brooke

Stuart Dallas wrote:

[snip] so $GLOBALS['GLOBALS']['GLOBALS']['GLOBALS']['_SERVER'] is a perfectly 
valid, if daft, way of accessing $_SERVER.

-Stuart




Now this is becoming educational! ;-)

Donovan


--
D Brooke

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-12 Thread Daniel Brown
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 14:16, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:

 As to placing an additional requirement (i.e., being predefined) on the 
 definition as to what constitutes a SuperGlobal is outside my understanding. 
 As such, I must defer to the PHP Manual, namely:

 http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php

 This document clearly states that $GLOBALS is a SuperGlobal -- what am I not 
 understanding here?

You are understanding it correctly, the only thing that's missing
is the population.  The variables are defined (set), but not all are
populated.  $GLOBALS is a superglobal, you're right; globals set from
userland scripts are not superglobals, but do wind up in the $GLOBALS
array.  Thus, all superglobals are globals, but not all globals are
superglobals.

-- 
/Daniel P. Brown
Network Infrastructure Manager
http://www.php.net/

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-12 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Mar 11, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
 
 In the following, $x is a global but not a super-global (AFAIK).
 
 
 ?php
 
 function echox ()
 {
 
 global $x;
 
 echo $x;
 
 }
 
 $x = Hello world\n;
 
 echox ();
 
 ?
 
 --
 Cheers  --  Tim


Tim:

I read somewhere that using:

global $x;

is not recommended. Whereas, it is recommended to use:

$x = $GLOBALS['x'];
echo $x;

In any event, what I found interesting is:

print_r($GLOBALS)

if will list all the variables (plus more) in your script. Thus, all variables 
in your main script are also included in the $GLOBALS array.

Cheers,

tedd

_
tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
http://sperling.com





--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-12 Thread Jim Giner
The purpose of the global statement within a function is to let PHP know 
that the usage of a var name INSIDE that function is not meant to create a 
NEW variable, but instead, to reference the other (global) variable being 
used (and perhaps already defined) in your main script.

Basically it works like this:

You can:
- create vars in the main script usable in that script's main body outside 
of any functions

- create vars to be used entirely and only within any functions in your 
script;

-reference vars from the main script within a specific function by 
referencing them with a global $xxx,$yyy,$zzz statement at the top of your 
function;

And Finally You Can:

- create $_SESSION['xxx'] var that can be seen anywhere in your 
application(s) during the life of the current session.  Close the browser or 
fail to do a session_start() in a script and you can't see them, but who 
would do that?

I'm sure someone will have something else to add, but I think this is all 
the knowledge one needs to accomplish most php programming. 



-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-12 Thread Tim Streater
On 12 Mar 2012 at 20:07, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote: 

 Tim:

 I read somewhere that using:

 global $x;

 is not recommended. Whereas, it is recommended to use:

 $x = $GLOBALS['x'];
 echo $x;

Tedd,

That may well be, although as I write I can't recollect having seen that 
anywhere; so I don't use that form. However I have been caught by something 
like the following:

?php

function yes ($a)
 {
 global $x;
 if  ($a)  $x = yes\n;
 }

first (true);

echo $x;

?


but I haven't looked into $GLOBALS enough to know whether using them instead 
would have saved my bacon.

--
Cheers  --  Tim

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-11 Thread Stuart Dallas
On 11 Mar 2012, at 01:43, Tedd Sperling wrote:

 On Mar 10, 2012, at 3:53 PM, tamouse mailing lists wrote:
 On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 That's correct, but to access those variables outside of their scope (such 
 as a function) you do via a SuperGlobal, namely $GLOBAL['whatever'].
 
 As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, 
 if I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.
 
 I guess I don't know what you mean by globals. I know what globals
 are, but not globals.
 
 I don't understand your question. I know what questions are, but not your 
 question. :-)

I think the confusion is arising because the word superglobal is used in PHP 
when referring to globals, because the word global has been incorrectly applied 
for quite some time.

A global variable is a variable that is accessible in every scope, so Tedd is 
right… the only true globals in PHP are the superglobals. Here's an overview of 
the various scopes in PHP (I've probably missed some, but it's enough to make 
the point)…

?php
  // Only visible when not in a function or class. The PHP manual calls
  // this the global scope: http://php.net/variables.scope
  $var1 = 'a';

  function funcB()
  {
// Only visible inside this function.
$var2 = 'b';
  }

  function funcB()
  {
// This statement makes the variable from the top-level scope visible
// within this function. Essentially this is the same as passing the
// variable in to the function by reference.
global $var1;
  }

  class classC
  {
// Visible to methods in this class only.
private $var3 = 'c';

// Visible to methods in this class and methods in derived classes.
protected $var4 = 'd';

// Method visible in this class only.
private methodA()
{
  // Visible only inside this method.
  $var5 = 'e';
}

// Method visible in this class and methods in derived classes.
protected methodB()
{
  // See funcB()
  global $var1;
}

// Method visible on any instance of this class.
public methodC()
{
  // See funcB()
  global $var1;
}
  }
?

The global keyword allows you to expose a variable that has been defined at the 
top-level scope ($var1 in the above example) in the current scope. It does NOT 
create a global variable; the keyword is not an accurate reflection of what it 
does.

My guess is that calling the top-level scope global made sense when functions 
were the only other level of scope that existed. Now that we have yet more 
levels of scope it can be a bit confusing.

I hope this helps clear things up.

-Stuart

-- 
Stuart Dallas
3ft9 Ltd
http://3ft9.com/
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-11 Thread Daniel Brown
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 10:37, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, if 
 I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.

A superglobal is predefined at run-time by the parser,
environment, SAPI, etc. (_SERVER, _POST, _GET, _REQUEST, _ENV,
_SESSION, _COOKIE), whereas a global can be defined at any time, and
is available to the current instance.  All superglobals are globals,
but not all globals are superglobals.

-- 
/Daniel P. Brown
Network Infrastructure Manager
http://www.php.net/

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-11 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Mar 11, 2012, at 10:25 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:

 On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 10:37, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, 
 if I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.
 
A superglobal is predefined at run-time by the parser,
 environment, SAPI, etc. (_SERVER, _POST, _GET, _REQUEST, _ENV,
 _SESSION, _COOKIE), whereas a global can be defined at any time, and
 is available to the current instance.  All superglobals are globals,
 but not all globals are superglobals.
 
 -- 
 /Daniel P. Brown
 Network Infrastructure Manager
 http://www.php.net/


Now I'm confused.

My understanding is that all variables defined within the main script are 
accessible within the main script because they are all within scope by 
definition.

Additionally, main script variables are not accessible out of scope (such as in 
a function) unless one uses $GLOBALS to retrieve those values.

That is the limit of my understanding of $GLOBALS.

As to placing an additional requirement (i.e., being predefined) on the 
definition as to what constitutes a SuperGlobal is outside my understanding. As 
such, I must defer to the PHP Manual, namely:

http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php

This document clearly states that $GLOBALS is a SuperGlobal -- what am I not 
understanding here?

Cheers,

tedd

_
tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
http://sperling.com





--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-11 Thread Tim Streater
On 11 Mar 2012 at 18:16, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote: 

 On Mar 11, 2012, at 10:25 AM, Daniel Brown wrote:

 On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 10:37, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said,
 if I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.

A superglobal is predefined at run-time by the parser,
 environment, SAPI, etc. (_SERVER, _POST, _GET, _REQUEST, _ENV,
 _SESSION, _COOKIE), whereas a global can be defined at any time, and
 is available to the current instance.  All superglobals are globals,
 but not all globals are superglobals.


 Now I'm confused.

 My understanding is that all variables defined within the main script are
 accessible within the main script because they are all within scope by
 definition.

 Additionally, main script variables are not accessible out of scope (such as
 in a function) unless one uses $GLOBALS to retrieve those values.

In the following, $x is a global but not a super-global (AFAIK).


?php

function echox ()
 {

 global $x;

 echo $x;

 }

$x = Hello world\n;

echox ();

?

--
Cheers  --  Tim

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-10 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Mar 9, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Jim Giner wrote:
 tamouse mailing lists tamouse.li...@gmail.com wrote in message 
 news:CAHUC_t8g43GE3xqvSU5SwFePGS1XG=tk1mhrbem9gjaarve...@mail.gmail.com...
 On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:10 AM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
 On 13 Feb 2012, at 06:28, Rui Hu wrote:
 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I 
 know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?
 
 Once your script starts the superglobals are no different to any other 
 variables, except that they're in scope at all times.
 
 That's probably the reason why they are named SuperGlobals. :-)
 
 But to be more descriptive, these are simply globals that are predefined 
 by php -- see:
 
 http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php
 
 I believe, (please show me otherwise) there are no globals in PHP other 
 than SuperGlobals.
 
 Assuming you mean pre-defined ones, there shouldn't be, since no other
 ones are documented. If there are, then either they should be
 documented, or they should be ignored as it can be dangerous to use
 undocumented features. :)
 
 Just to be clear - you asked if it were true that there are no globals in 
 PHP other than SuperGlobals:  Don't forget that anything that you declare as 
 global in a script is a global for that instance of that script (and 
 whatever includes, etc. that it calls during its run) 

That's correct, but to access those variables outside of their scope (such as a 
function) you do via a SuperGlobal, namely $GLOBAL['whatever'].

As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, if 
I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.

Cheers,

tedd

_
tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
http://sperling.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-10 Thread Jim Giner

Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote in message 
news:315faa8f-3103-4661-b167-d30248952...@gmail.com...
On Mar 9, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Jim Giner wrote:
 tamouse mailing lists tamouse.li...@gmail.com wrote in message
 news:CAHUC_t8g43GE3xqvSU5SwFePGS1XG=tk1mhrbem9gjaarve...@mail.gmail.com...
 On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:10 AM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
 On 13 Feb 2012, at 06:28, Rui Hu wrote:
 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I
 know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?

 Once your script starts the superglobals are no different to any other
 variables, except that they're in scope at all times.

 That's probably the reason why they are named SuperGlobals. :-)

 But to be more descriptive, these are simply globals that are predefined
 by php -- see:

 http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php

 I believe, (please show me otherwise) there are no globals in PHP 
 other
 than SuperGlobals.

 Assuming you mean pre-defined ones, there shouldn't be, since no other
 ones are documented. If there are, then either they should be
 documented, or they should be ignored as it can be dangerous to use
 undocumented features. :)

 Just to be clear - you asked if it were true that there are no globals 
 in
 PHP other than SuperGlobals:  Don't forget that anything that you declare 
 as
 global in a script is a global for that instance of that script (and
 whatever includes, etc. that it calls during its run)

That's correct, but to access those variables outside of their scope (such 
as a function) you do via a SuperGlobal, namely $GLOBAL['whatever'].

As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, 
if I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.

Cheers,

tedd
**
Actually - I've never used $GLOBAL - I've just referenced them by their 
name as specified in the global statement - so it's not always obvious 
that a specific var IS a global.I can see thought that you are aware of 
them so my point is unnecessary. 



-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-10 Thread tamouse mailing lists
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mar 9, 2012, at 10:20 PM, Jim Giner wrote:
 tamouse mailing lists tamouse.li...@gmail.com wrote in message
 news:CAHUC_t8g43GE3xqvSU5SwFePGS1XG=tk1mhrbem9gjaarve...@mail.gmail.com...
 On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:10 AM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
 On 13 Feb 2012, at 06:28, Rui Hu wrote:
 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I
 know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?

 Once your script starts the superglobals are no different to any other
 variables, except that they're in scope at all times.

 That's probably the reason why they are named SuperGlobals. :-)

 But to be more descriptive, these are simply globals that are predefined
 by php -- see:

 http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php

 I believe, (please show me otherwise) there are no globals in PHP other
 than SuperGlobals.

 Assuming you mean pre-defined ones, there shouldn't be, since no other
 ones are documented. If there are, then either they should be
 documented, or they should be ignored as it can be dangerous to use
 undocumented features. :)

 Just to be clear - you asked if it were true that there are no globals in
 PHP other than SuperGlobals:  Don't forget that anything that you declare as
 global in a script is a global for that instance of that script (and
 whatever includes, etc. that it calls during its run)

 That's correct, but to access those variables outside of their scope (such as 
 a function) you do via a SuperGlobal, namely $GLOBAL['whatever'].

 As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, if 
 I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.

I guess I don't know what you mean by globals. I know what globals
are, but not globals.

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-10 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Mar 10, 2012, at 3:53 PM, tamouse mailing lists wrote:
 On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 That's correct, but to access those variables outside of their scope (such 
 as a function) you do via a SuperGlobal, namely $GLOBAL['whatever'].
 
 As such, there are no globals in PHP other than SuperGlobals. As I said, 
 if I'm wrong, please show me otherwise.
 
 I guess I don't know what you mean by globals. I know what globals
 are, but not globals.

I don't understand your question. I know what questions are, but not your 
question. :-)

Cheers,

tedd


_
tedd.sperl...@gmail.com
http://sperling.com


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-09 Thread tamouse mailing lists
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:10 AM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
 On 13 Feb 2012, at 06:28, Rui Hu wrote:
 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?

 Once your script starts the superglobals are no different to any other 
 variables, except that they're in scope at all times.

 That's probably the reason why they are named SuperGlobals. :-)

 But to be more descriptive, these are simply globals that are predefined by 
 php -- see:

 http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php

 I believe, (please show me otherwise) there are no globals in PHP other 
 than SuperGlobals.

Assuming you mean pre-defined ones, there shouldn't be, since no other
ones are documented. If there are, then either they should be
documented, or they should be ignored as it can be dangerous to use
undocumented features. :)

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-03-09 Thread Jim Giner

tamouse mailing lists tamouse.li...@gmail.com wrote in message 
news:CAHUC_t8g43GE3xqvSU5SwFePGS1XG=tk1mhrbem9gjaarve...@mail.gmail.com...
 On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Tedd Sperling tedd.sperl...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:10 AM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
 On 13 Feb 2012, at 06:28, Rui Hu wrote:
 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I 
 know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?

 Once your script starts the superglobals are no different to any other 
 variables, except that they're in scope at all times.

 That's probably the reason why they are named SuperGlobals. :-)

 But to be more descriptive, these are simply globals that are predefined 
 by php -- see:

 http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php

 I believe, (please show me otherwise) there are no globals in PHP other 
 than SuperGlobals.

 Assuming you mean pre-defined ones, there shouldn't be, since no other
 ones are documented. If there are, then either they should be
 documented, or they should be ignored as it can be dangerous to use
 undocumented features. :)

Just to be clear - you asked if it were true that there are no globals in 
PHP other than SuperGlobals:  Don't forget that anything that you declare as 
global in a script is a global for that instance of that script (and 
whatever includes, etc. that it calls during its run) 



-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-02-13 Thread Stuart Dallas
On 13 Feb 2012, at 06:28, Rui Hu wrote:

 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?


Once your script starts the superglobals are no different to any other 
variables, except that they're in scope at all times.

The only thing you need to bear in mind if you're going to modify them is that 
other code that's using them will also see your changes, so beware of knock-on 
effects.

-Stuart

-- 
Stuart Dallas
3ft9 Ltd
http://3ft9.com/

Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-02-13 Thread Tedd Sperling
On Feb 13, 2012, at 4:10 AM, Stuart Dallas wrote:

 On 13 Feb 2012, at 06:28, Rui Hu wrote:
 
 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?
 
 Once your script starts the superglobals are no different to any other 
 variables, except that they're in scope at all times.

That's probably the reason why they are named SuperGlobals. :-)

But to be more descriptive, these are simply globals that are predefined by php 
-- see:

http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.superglobals.php

I believe, (please show me otherwise) there are no globals in PHP other than 
SuperGlobals.

Cheers,

tedd

_
t...@sperling.com
http://sperling.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] questions about $_SERVER

2012-02-12 Thread Michael Save
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Rui Hu tchrb...@gmail.com wrote:
 hi,

 How PHP sets variables in $_SERVER, say, $DOCUMENT_ROOT? What should I know
 if I want to modify $_SERVER myself?

 Thanks!


 --
 Best regards,

 Rui Hu
 
 State Key Laboratory of Networking  Switching Technology
 Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications(BUPT)
 MSN: tchrb...@gmail.com
 -

Rui,

$_SERVER is an associative array. You can access DOCUMENT_ROOT with
$_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT']. It contains the document root directory
under which the current script is executing.

You can make changes to the $_SERVER array but it will have no effect
on PHP itself. I mean, you can change the value of
$_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] to whatever you want at runtime, but of
course it will not actually change the current directory if that's
what you're after.

Thanks,
Michael

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-09-03 Thread tedd

Peter and Paul:

Sorry, I went on vacation for a few days (it was a surprise vacation 
with a 2 day notice).


I think you both understand what I was looking for and found what I 
wanted was not possible. It's just one of those things in life you 
have to live with.


Thanks very much for your time and comment.

Cheers,

tedd
--
---
http://sperling.com/

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-30 Thread Paul M Foster
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 06:04:23PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

 Jason Pruim wrote:
 
  My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near
  impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the
  initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from
  there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.
 
  All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...
  
  Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can
  do what you are looking at because the IP address will always
  translate back to your website.
 
 AFAICT, Tedd was not asking about the server, he's asking about the
 client. 

No, he's talking about the server. But the server he's using may offload
the processing of a script to another machine. So

$_SERVER['SERVER_ADDR'] and $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME']

both relate to the server which the client is originally communicating
with. But he wants to know if he can get the same information about a
different remote server which is processing a script for him. The
problem is that we have:

$_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']

but no

$_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME']

So the question is, how would he get that last variable. It becomes
complicated when using a shared hosting environment, because server
names and IPs aren't a 1:1 mapping. An IP may represent numerous actual
site names. This was part or all of the reason why the http protocol was
revised from 1.0 to 1.1-- in order to accommodate all the domains, which
because of the cramped IP space of IPv4, had to share IPs. So in the
HTTP 1.1 protocol, there is additional information passed about the name
of the domain.

Paul


-- 
Paul M. Foster

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-30 Thread Peter Lind
On 30 August 2010 21:32, Paul M Foster pa...@quillandmouse.com wrote:
 On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 06:04:23PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

 Jason Pruim wrote:

  My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near
  impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the
  initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from
  there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.
 
  All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...
 
  Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can
  do what you are looking at because the IP address will always
  translate back to your website.

 AFAICT, Tedd was not asking about the server, he's asking about the
 client.

 No, he's talking about the server. But the server he's using may offload
 the processing of a script to another machine. So

 $_SERVER['SERVER_ADDR'] and $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME']

 both relate to the server which the client is originally communicating
 with. But he wants to know if he can get the same information about a
 different remote server which is processing a script for him. The
 problem is that we have:

 $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']

 but no

 $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME']

 So the question is, how would he get that last variable. It becomes
 complicated when using a shared hosting environment, because server
 names and IPs aren't a 1:1 mapping. An IP may represent numerous actual
 site names. This was part or all of the reason why the http protocol was
 revised from 1.0 to 1.1-- in order to accommodate all the domains, which
 because of the cramped IP space of IPv4, had to share IPs. So in the
 HTTP 1.1 protocol, there is additional information passed about the name
 of the domain.


In the scenario painted, it's explicitly stated that one server acts
as a client in trying to access a resource on another server. Could
you enlighten me as to where the domain name of a client is located in
the request header fields? Here's the RFC for HTTP 1.1
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.3

Regards
Peter

-- 
hype
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51
Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15
/hype

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-30 Thread Paul M Foster
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 09:53:46PM +0200, Peter Lind wrote:

 On 30 August 2010 21:32, Paul M Foster pa...@quillandmouse.com wrote:
  On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 06:04:23PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
 
  Jason Pruim wrote:
 
   My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near
   impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the
   initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from
   there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.
  
   All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...
  
   Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can
   do what you are looking at because the IP address will always
   translate back to your website.
 
  AFAICT, Tedd was not asking about the server, he's asking about the
  client.
 
  No, he's talking about the server. But the server he's using may offload
  the processing of a script to another machine. So
 
  $_SERVER['SERVER_ADDR'] and $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME']
 
  both relate to the server which the client is originally communicating
  with. But he wants to know if he can get the same information about a
  different remote server which is processing a script for him. The
  problem is that we have:
 
  $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']
 
  but no
 
  $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME']
 
  So the question is, how would he get that last variable. It becomes
  complicated when using a shared hosting environment, because server
  names and IPs aren't a 1:1 mapping. An IP may represent numerous actual
  site names. This was part or all of the reason why the http protocol was
  revised from 1.0 to 1.1-- in order to accommodate all the domains, which
  because of the cramped IP space of IPv4, had to share IPs. So in the
  HTTP 1.1 protocol, there is additional information passed about the name
  of the domain.
 
 
 In the scenario painted, it's explicitly stated that one server acts
 as a client in trying to access a resource on another server. Could
 you enlighten me as to where the domain name of a client is located in
 the request header fields? Here's the RFC for HTTP 1.1
 http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.3

From http://www8.org/w8-papers/5c-protocols/key/key.html:

=== EXCERPT ===

Internet address conservation

Companies and organizations use URLs to advertise themselves and their
products and services. When a URL appears in a medium other than the Web
itself, people seem to prefer ``pure hostname'' URLs; i.e., URLs without
any path syntax following the hostname. These are often known as
``vanity URLs,'' but in spite of the implied disparagement, it's
unlikely that non-purist users will abandon this practice, which has led
to the continuing creation of huge numbers of hostnames.

IP addresses are widely perceived as a scarce resource (pending the
uncertain transition to IPv6 [DH95]). The Domain Name System (DNS)
allows multiple host names to be bound to the same IP address.
Unfortunately, because the original designers of HTTP did not anticipate
the ``success disaster'' they were enabling, HTTP/1.0 requests do not
pass the hostname part of the request URL. For example, if a user makes
a request for the resource at URL http://example1.org/home.html, the
browser sends a message with the Request-Line

GET /home.html HTTP/1.0

to the server at example1.org. This prevents the binding of another HTTP
server hostname, such as exampleB.org to the same IP address, because
the server receiving such a message cannot tell which server the message
is meant for. Thus, the proliferation of vanity URLs causes a
proliferation of IP address allocations.

The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), which manages the IETF
process, insisted that HTTP/1.1 take steps to improve conservation of IP
addresses. Since HTTP/1.1 had to interoperate with HTTP/1.0, it could
not change the format of the Request-Line to include the server
hostname. Instead, HTTP/1.1 requires requests to include a Host header,
first proposed by John Franks [Fra94], that carries the hostname. This
converts the example above to:

GET /home.html HTTP/1.1
Host: example1.org

If the URL references a port other than the default (TCP port 80), this
is also given in the Host header.

Clearly, since HTTP/1.0 clients will not send Host headers, HTTP/1.1
servers cannot simply reject all messages without them. However, the
HTTP/1.1 specification requires that an HTTP/1.1 server must reject any
HTTP/1.1 message that does not contain a Host header.

The intent of the Host header mechanism, and in particular the
requirement that enforces its presence in HTTP/1.1 requests, is to speed
the transition away from assigning a new IP address for every vanity
URL. However, as long as a substantial fraction of the users on the
Internet use browsers that do not send Host, no Web site operator (such
as an electronic commerce business) that depends on these users will
give up a vanity-URL IP address. The transition, 

Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-30 Thread Peter Lind
On 30 August 2010 22:34, Paul M Foster pa...@quillandmouse.com wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 09:53:46PM +0200, Peter Lind wrote:

 On 30 August 2010 21:32, Paul M Foster pa...@quillandmouse.com wrote:
  On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 06:04:23PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
 
  Jason Pruim wrote:
 
   My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near
   impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the
   initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from
   there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.
  
   All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...
  
   Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can
   do what you are looking at because the IP address will always
   translate back to your website.
 
  AFAICT, Tedd was not asking about the server, he's asking about the
  client.
 
  No, he's talking about the server. But the server he's using may offload
  the processing of a script to another machine. So
 
  $_SERVER['SERVER_ADDR'] and $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME']
 
  both relate to the server which the client is originally communicating
  with. But he wants to know if he can get the same information about a
  different remote server which is processing a script for him. The
  problem is that we have:
 
  $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']
 
  but no
 
  $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME']
 
  So the question is, how would he get that last variable. It becomes
  complicated when using a shared hosting environment, because server
  names and IPs aren't a 1:1 mapping. An IP may represent numerous actual
  site names. This was part or all of the reason why the http protocol was
  revised from 1.0 to 1.1-- in order to accommodate all the domains, which
  because of the cramped IP space of IPv4, had to share IPs. So in the
  HTTP 1.1 protocol, there is additional information passed about the name
  of the domain.
 

 In the scenario painted, it's explicitly stated that one server acts
 as a client in trying to access a resource on another server. Could
 you enlighten me as to where the domain name of a client is located in
 the request header fields? Here's the RFC for HTTP 1.1
 http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.3

 From http://www8.org/w8-papers/5c-protocols/key/key.html:

 === EXCERPT ===

 Internet address conservation

 Companies and organizations use URLs to advertise themselves and their
 products and services. When a URL appears in a medium other than the Web
 itself, people seem to prefer ``pure hostname'' URLs; i.e., URLs without
 any path syntax following the hostname. These are often known as
 ``vanity URLs,'' but in spite of the implied disparagement, it's
 unlikely that non-purist users will abandon this practice, which has led
 to the continuing creation of huge numbers of hostnames.

 IP addresses are widely perceived as a scarce resource (pending the
 uncertain transition to IPv6 [DH95]). The Domain Name System (DNS)
 allows multiple host names to be bound to the same IP address.
 Unfortunately, because the original designers of HTTP did not anticipate
 the ``success disaster'' they were enabling, HTTP/1.0 requests do not
 pass the hostname part of the request URL. For example, if a user makes
 a request for the resource at URL http://example1.org/home.html, the
 browser sends a message with the Request-Line

    GET /home.html HTTP/1.0

 to the server at example1.org. This prevents the binding of another HTTP
 server hostname, such as exampleB.org to the same IP address, because
 the server receiving such a message cannot tell which server the message
 is meant for. Thus, the proliferation of vanity URLs causes a
 proliferation of IP address allocations.

 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), which manages the IETF
 process, insisted that HTTP/1.1 take steps to improve conservation of IP
 addresses. Since HTTP/1.1 had to interoperate with HTTP/1.0, it could
 not change the format of the Request-Line to include the server
 hostname. Instead, HTTP/1.1 requires requests to include a Host header,
 first proposed by John Franks [Fra94], that carries the hostname. This
 converts the example above to:

    GET /home.html HTTP/1.1
            Host: example1.org

 If the URL references a port other than the default (TCP port 80), this
 is also given in the Host header.

 Clearly, since HTTP/1.0 clients will not send Host headers, HTTP/1.1
 servers cannot simply reject all messages without them. However, the
 HTTP/1.1 specification requires that an HTTP/1.1 server must reject any
 HTTP/1.1 message that does not contain a Host header.

 The intent of the Host header mechanism, and in particular the
 requirement that enforces its presence in HTTP/1.1 requests, is to speed
 the transition away from assigning a new IP address for every vanity
 URL. However, as long as a substantial fraction of the users on the
 Internet use browsers that do not send Host, no Web site operator (such
 as an 

Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-30 Thread Paul M Foster
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:34:42PM +0200, Peter Lind wrote:

 On 30 August 2010 22:34, Paul M Foster pa...@quillandmouse.com wrote:
  On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 09:53:46PM +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
 

snip

   $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME']
  
   So the question is, how would he get that last variable. It becomes
   complicated when using a shared hosting environment, because server
   names and IPs aren't a 1:1 mapping. An IP may represent numerous actual
   site names. This was part or all of the reason why the http protocol was
   revised from 1.0 to 1.1-- in order to accommodate all the domains, which
   because of the cramped IP space of IPv4, had to share IPs. So in the
   HTTP 1.1 protocol, there is additional information passed about the name
   of the domain.
  
 
  In the scenario painted, it's explicitly stated that one server acts
  as a client in trying to access a resource on another server. Could
  you enlighten me as to where the domain name of a client is located in
  the request header fields? Here's the RFC for HTTP 1.1
  http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.3
 
  From http://www8.org/w8-papers/5c-protocols/key/key.html:

snip

 
  My mistake, though: this change was by no means the only reason for the
  creation of HTTP 1.1
 
 Not only that, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the case at hand.
 The Host header field specifies the domain you're asking a resource
 from, not the the domain of the client. Hence, it cannot be used in
 any fashion to provide identification of the client doing the request,
 which is what Tedd wanted.

Tedd was looking for the server name for the remote server, as seen from
the perspective of the asking server. In his example, he was looking for
a variable which would tell him Slave's name from Master's
perspective. That's why he was asking if there was anything like
$_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME'] as a known PHP server variable.

Of course, you're correct in that the HTTP 1.1 spec I cited wouldn't help
him. I just mentioned it as being of tangential interest.

Paul

-- 
Paul M. Foster

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-30 Thread Paul M Foster
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 05:13:59PM -0400, Paul M Foster wrote:

 On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:34:42PM +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
 
  On 30 August 2010 22:34, Paul M Foster pa...@quillandmouse.com wrote:
   On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 09:53:46PM +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
  
 
 snip
 
$_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME']
   
So the question is, how would he get that last variable. It becomes
complicated when using a shared hosting environment, because server
names and IPs aren't a 1:1 mapping. An IP may represent numerous
 actual
site names. This was part or all of the reason why the http
 protocol was
revised from 1.0 to 1.1-- in order to accommodate all the domains,
 which
because of the cramped IP space of IPv4, had to share IPs. So in the
HTTP 1.1 protocol, there is additional information passed about
 the name
of the domain.
   
  
   In the scenario painted, it's explicitly stated that one server acts
   as a client in trying to access a resource on another server. Could
   you enlighten me as to where the domain name of a client is located in
   the request header fields? Here's the RFC for HTTP 1.1
   http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.3
  
   From http://www8.org/w8-papers/5c-protocols/key/key.html:
 
 snip
 
  
   My mistake, though: this change was by no means the only reason for the
   creation of HTTP 1.1
 
  Not only that, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the case at hand.
  The Host header field specifies the domain you're asking a resource
  from, not the the domain of the client. Hence, it cannot be used in
  any fashion to provide identification of the client doing the request,
  which is what Tedd wanted.
 
 Tedd was looking for the server name for the remote server, as seen from
 the perspective of the asking server. In his example, he was looking for
 a variable which would tell him Slave's name from Master's
 perspective. That's why he was asking if there was anything like
 $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME'] as a known PHP server variable.

I'm mistaken here. He's looking for the name of the server making the
request, which doesn't appear to be transmitted anywhere.

Paul

-- 
Paul M. Foster

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-29 Thread Jim Lucas

tedd wrote:

At 12:15 AM +0200 8/29/10, Peter Lind wrote:

On 28 August 2010 23:45, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:

  So, I'm trying to figure out a compliment to 
$_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] such as

 something like $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME'].


  Is there such a beast?

You're not making any sense. For the script on your local host to be
able to connect and communicate with the remote host, it would need to
know the name of the remote host. Hence, the local host already knows
the name and has no reason to ask the remote host for a name by which
to contact it.
 That's what I get from your description of the problem. You probably
want to clarify some things.

Regards
Peter


Peter:

Sorry for not making sense. But sometimes you have to confirm the 
players (both server and remote) in communications.


Try this -- place this script on your site:

?php
print_r($_SERVER);
?

You will note that:

[SERVER_NAME] = is the domain name of your site.

Also:

[SERVER_ADDR] = is the IP of your site. If you are on a shared host, 
then it will still be the IP of the main host.


Please note:

[REMOTE_ADDR] = is the IP of the remote server. It *will be* the IP of 
the remote main host regardless of if the requesting script is running 
on the remote main host OR is running under a remote shared host.


Here's an example:

My site http://webbytedd.com is running on a shared host.

The server address reported for this site is: 74.208.162.186

However, if I enter 74.208.162.186 into a browser, I do not arrive at 
webbytedd.com, but instead go to securelayer.com who is my host.


Now, if webbytedd.com was the requesting script, how could the original 
script know what domain name the request came from? As it is now, it can 
only know the main host ID, but not the domain name of the requesting 
script. Does that make my question any clearer?


So my questions basically is -- how can I discover the actual domain 
name of the remote script when it is running on a shared server?


Their is not existing variable (if you would) that your server, when 
connecting to a remote server, would be sending.  So, to have the remote 
end be able to identify the initiating host identity, the initiating 
side would have to add some something to the headers or pass it along in 
the body of the request itself.


What type of service are you trying to create on your server?  And what 
protocol would it be using to connect to the remote server?  If you are 
using cURL, you could add something to the headers before you send the 
request.  But, if you are using something like fopen or 
file_get_contents, you are stuck.  You would not be able to modify the 
headers being sent in the request.


If you are in need of identifying the initial server from the second 
server, then I would suggest using cURL and adding something unique to 
the headers before you send the request to the remote server.


Hope that is clear as mud.



I hope that makes better sense.

Cheers,

tedd




--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-29 Thread Peter Lind
On 29 August 2010 08:08, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:

*snip*

 Their is not existing variable (if you would) that your server, when
 connecting to a remote server, would be sending.  So, to have the remote end
 be able to identify the initiating host identity, the initiating side would
 have to add some something to the headers or pass it along in the body of
 the request itself.


+1. Let the requestion script send through identification/authentification.

Regards
Peter

-- 
hype
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51
Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15
/hype

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-29 Thread tedd

At 10:56 AM +0200 8/29/10, Peter Lind wrote:

On 29 August 2010 08:08, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:

*snip*


 Their is not existing variable (if you would) that your server, when
 connecting to a remote server, would be sending.  So, to have the remote end
 be able to identify the initiating host identity, the initiating side would
 have to add some something to the headers or pass it along in the body of
 the request itself.



+1. Let the requestion script send through identification/authentification.

Regards
Peter


To all:

My post about SERVER globals was simply an observation that the 
SERVER global report of host and remote was not symmetric -- for 
example you could obtain both the IP and Domain Name of the host, but 
only the IP of the remote. Sorry for any confusion I may have caused 
in my post.


As to the reason why I was asking, please review my next post, namely 
Secure Communication?


Cheers,

tedd

--
---
http://sperling.com/

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-29 Thread Jason Pruim


On Aug 29, 2010, at 10:55 AM, tedd wrote:


At 10:56 AM +0200 8/29/10, Peter Lind wrote:

On 29 August 2010 08:08, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote:

*snip*


Their is not existing variable (if you would) that your server, when
connecting to a remote server, would be sending.  So, to have the  
remote end
be able to identify the initiating host identity, the initiating  
side would
have to add some something to the headers or pass it along in the  
body of

the request itself.



+1. Let the requestion script send through identification/ 
authentification.


Regards
Peter


To all:

My post about SERVER globals was simply an observation that the  
SERVER global report of host and remote was not symmetric -- for  
example you could obtain both the IP and Domain Name of the host,  
but only the IP of the remote. Sorry for any confusion I may have  
caused in my post.


As to the reason why I was asking, please review my next post,  
namely Secure Communication?


Cheers,

tedd



Hey tedd,

My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near  
impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the  
initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from  
there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.


All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...

Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can  
do what you are looking at because the IP address will always  
translate back to your website.


Now hopefully my understanding of shared hosting isn't flawed but if  
it is I'm sure someone will nicely point out why :)




--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-29 Thread tedd

At 11:54 AM -0400 8/29/10, Jason Pruim wrote:

On Aug 29, 2010, at 10:55 AM, tedd wrote:


To all:

My post about SERVER globals was simply an observation that the 
SERVER global report of host and remote was not symmetric -- for 
example you could obtain both the IP and Domain Name of the host, 
but only the IP of the remote. Sorry for any confusion I may have 
caused in my post.



Hey tedd,

My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near 
impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the 
initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from 
there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.


All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...

Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can 
do what you are looking at because the IP address will always 
translate back to your website.


Now hopefully my understanding of shared hosting isn't flawed but if 
it is I'm sure someone will nicely point out why :)



Your understanding is the same as my understanding.

Cheers,

tedd

--
---
http://sperling.com/

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-29 Thread Per Jessen
Jason Pruim wrote:

 My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near
 impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the
 initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from
 there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.

 All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...
 
 Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can
 do what you are looking at because the IP address will always
 translate back to your website.

AFAICT, Tedd was not asking about the server, he's asking about the
client. 


-- 
Per Jessen, Zürich (17.2°C)


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-29 Thread Peter Lind
On 29 August 2010 18:04, Per Jessen p...@computer.org wrote:
 Jason Pruim wrote:

 My understanding of how shared hosting works would make this near
 impossible... Basically Apache grabs a header that is sent at the
 initial connection which includes the destination hostname and from
 there it translates it to the proper directory on the shared host.

 All the IP's though are based off of the parent site's server...

 Now with dedicated hosting where you have the entire machine you can
 do what you are looking at because the IP address will always
 translate back to your website.


The HTTP protocol does not provide a domain among the request header
fields - you need to implement idenfication/authentication in a
different manner (preferably in a way that does not rely upon IP
addresses, seeing as that doesn't provide any reliable sort of
identification).

Regards
Peter

-- 
hype
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51
Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15
/hype

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-28 Thread Per Jessen
tedd wrote:

 Hi gang:
 
 The server global:
 
 $_SERVER['SERVER_ADDR']
 
 Provides the IP of the server where the current script is executing.
 
 And, the server global:
 
 $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']
 
 Provides the IP of the server executing the script.

Yes, aka the client address. 

 As such, you can enter the IP of either into a browser and see that
 specific domain.

Huh?  If my server is 192.168.29.104 and my client is 192.168.29.114, I
might get the default website on the server address, and nothing on the
client (assuming it is not running a webserver).

 However, that doesn't work when you are dealing with shared hosting.
 Doing that will show you to the parent domain, but not the child
 domain (i.e., alias).
 
 So, how can I identify the exact location of the 'server_addr' and of
 the 'remote_addr' on shared hosting? Is that possible?

$_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] will tell you the name of the virtual host - I
don't know if that is what you're after.



-- 
Per Jessen, Zürich (12.2°C)


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-28 Thread tedd

At 9:41 PM +0200 8/28/10, Per Jessen wrote:

tedd wrote:
 

 So, how can I identify the exact location of the 'server_addr' and of
 the 'remote_addr' on shared hosting? Is that possible?


$_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] will tell you the name of the virtual host - I
don't know if that is what you're after.

--
Per Jessen, Zürich (12.2°C)


Certainly, $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] will tell you 
the name of the virtual host, but what about the 
virtual remote?


You see, I can have a script on one server 
communicate with another script on a another 
server and the remote addresses reported on 
either will not translate back to their 
respective virtual hosts, but instead to their 
hosts.


So, I'm trying to figure out a compliment to 
$_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] such as something like 
$_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME'].


Is there such a beast?

Cheers,

tedd

--
---
http://sperling.com/

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-28 Thread Peter Lind
On 28 August 2010 23:45, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:
 At 9:41 PM +0200 8/28/10, Per Jessen wrote:

 tedd wrote:
  

  So, how can I identify the exact location of the 'server_addr' and of
  the 'remote_addr' on shared hosting? Is that possible?

 $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] will tell you the name of the virtual host - I
 don't know if that is what you're after.

 --
 Per Jessen, Zürich (12.2°C)

 Certainly, $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] will tell you the name of the virtual
 host, but what about the virtual remote?

 You see, I can have a script on one server communicate with another script
 on a another server and the remote addresses reported on either will not
 translate back to their respective virtual hosts, but instead to their
 hosts.

 So, I'm trying to figure out a compliment to $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] such as
 something like $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME'].

 Is there such a beast?


You're not making any sense. For the script on your local host to be
able to connect and communicate with the remote host, it would need to
know the name of the remote host. Hence, the local host already knows
the name and has no reason to ask the remote host for a name by which
to contact it.
 That's what I get from your description of the problem. You probably
want to clarify some things.

Regards
Peter

-- 
hype
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
BeWelcome/Couchsurfing: Fake51
Twitter: http://twitter.com/kafe15
/hype

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-28 Thread tedd

At 12:15 AM +0200 8/29/10, Peter Lind wrote:

On 28 August 2010 23:45, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote:

  So, I'm trying to figure out a compliment to 
$_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'] such as

 something like $_SERVER['REMOTE_NAME'].


  Is there such a beast?

You're not making any sense. For the script on your local host to be
able to connect and communicate with the remote host, it would need to
know the name of the remote host. Hence, the local host already knows
the name and has no reason to ask the remote host for a name by which
to contact it.
 That's what I get from your description of the problem. You probably
want to clarify some things.

Regards
Peter


Peter:

Sorry for not making sense. But sometimes you have to confirm the 
players (both server and remote) in communications.


Try this -- place this script on your site:

?php
print_r($_SERVER);
?

You will note that:

[SERVER_NAME] = is the domain name of your site.

Also:

[SERVER_ADDR] = is the IP of your site. If you are on a shared host, 
then it will still be the IP of the main host.


Please note:

[REMOTE_ADDR] = is the IP of the remote server. It *will be* the IP 
of the remote main host regardless of if the requesting script is 
running on the remote main host OR is running under a remote shared 
host.


Here's an example:

My site http://webbytedd.com is running on a shared host.

The server address reported for this site is: 74.208.162.186

However, if I enter 74.208.162.186 into a browser, I do not arrive at 
webbytedd.com, but instead go to securelayer.com who is my host.


Now, if webbytedd.com was the requesting script, how could the 
original script know what domain name the request came from? As it is 
now, it can only know the main host ID, but not the domain name of 
the requesting script. Does that make my question any clearer?


So my questions basically is -- how can I discover the actual domain 
name of the remote script when it is running on a shared server?


I hope that makes better sense.

Cheers,

tedd

--
---
http://sperling.com/

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php



Re: [PHP] Questions about $_SERVER

2010-08-28 Thread Tamara Temple
Sorry, forgot to include the mailing list email when I replied to this  
originally...


On Aug 28, 2010, at 8:28 PM, tedd wrote:

Sorry for not making sense. But sometimes you have to confirm the  
players (both server and remote) in communications.


Try this -- place this script on your site:

?php
print_r($_SERVER);
?

You will note that:

[SERVER_NAME] = is the domain name of your site.

Also:

[SERVER_ADDR] = is the IP of your site. If you are on a shared  
host, then it will still be the IP of the main host.


Please note:

[REMOTE_ADDR] = is the IP of the remote server. It *will be* the IP  
of the remote main host regardless of if the requesting script is  
running on the remote main host OR is running under a remote shared  
host.


Here's an example:

My site http://webbytedd.com is running on a shared host.

The server address reported for this site is: 74.208.162.186

However, if I enter 74.208.162.186 into a browser, I do not arrive  
at webbytedd.com, but instead go to securelayer.com who is my host.


Now, if webbytedd.com was the requesting script, how could the  
original script know what domain name the request came from? As it  
is now, it can only know the main host ID, but not the domain name  
of the requesting script. Does that make my question any clearer?


So my questions basically is -- how can I discover the actual domain  
name of the remote script when it is running on a shared server?


I hope that makes better sense.

Cheers,

tedd



I really don't understand what you mean by remote script -- most  
requests are made by clients. REMOTE_ADDR is the IP address of the  
*client* - i.e. the requesting system. It may or may not be a script.  
And it may or may not have an accessible hostname.


Is this a situation where you are establishing a service that is to be  
called by other servers, i.e, some form of API? If not, and if it is a  
case of a browser client calling a PHP script on your server, most  
browser clients aren't running on very useful hostnames for the  
outside world anyway. E.g. the hostname of my mac is paladin.local  
but it obviously can't be called by the outside world by that name.  
Maybe tell us what you are trying to accomplish by knowing the  
hostname of the calling machine? Maybe there's another way.


Are you trying to set up two-way communication between the two  
servers?  Normally, communication is established without regard for  
the calling machine's hostname, because it's going through the  
connection established by the web server. PHP just returns info along  
that connection to the calling machine. It seems you would only need  
to know the requesting system's hostname if you were going to  
establish some other channel of communication with it, i.e., if your  
original script was somehow going to call back the calling machine,  
webbytedd.com to do some other kind of activity. If that *is* what  
you're doing, I can probably guarantee there's a better way to do it.


However, if what you're after is *authenticating* that the requester  
is who they say they are, there are ways to do that as well without  
knowing the requesting host's name (and better than knowing the  
requesting host's name, you can establish authenticity and access  
control for a particular script which is much better than just  
establishing blanket authority for a particular hostname).


However, I'm really reaching here with trying to understand what you  
want to accomplish by knowing the requesting machine's hostname.


So, please, explain what you are trying to do and maybe we can help  
with that.


Tamara


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php