Robert Collins added the comment:
FWIW we probably need to capture the original unaltered URL somewhere, but also
ensure that PATH_INFO is always a relative path.
One should be able to implement a proxy in WSGI (because thats just another
specialised app), and doing that today requires
Robert Collins added the comment:
Oh, also - while its tempting to say that it doesn't matter whether we take the
urls host portion, or the host header or the server name - it does. Deployments
that look like:
LB/Firewall - backend container - WSGI app
are likely to have assumptions within
mouad added the comment:
Hi Guido,
If I understand this correctly, the HOST header was added only in HTTP1.1 and
setting the absolute URI was the right behavior client should follow if they
are behind a proxy for HTTP1.0, but the same behavior was kept in HTTP1.1 for
backward compatibility.
Guido van Rossum added the comment:
Wow. This is interesting. I thought that absolute URL support was only for
proxies, but the spec you quote says clearly it should be supported as a
transition towards always specifying the full URL. I guess they want to get rid
of the Host: header?
In any
New submission from mouad:
Hi,
As most of you know, working behind a HTTP proxy raise all this corner cases
that no one think about until he has to, one of them i had to deal with some
months ago is absolute request URI in HTTP request, that some client will send
when they detect that they
Changes by mouad mouad...@gmail.com:
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file35214/issue21472.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue21472
___
Changes by Berker Peksag berker.pek...@gmail.com:
--
stage: - patch review
versions: -Python 3.1, Python 3.2, Python 3.3
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue21472
___
