On Aug 18, 2011, at 8:36 AM, vapirix wrote: > I read that in the documentation, but it was JUST ambiguous enough > that I thought it might work for my uses. I can't imagine a time when > I would want to limit it in the URL helper without also limiting the > incoming URLs. It seems like an also-intended functionality. =)
I regard it as a bug in both the code and the documentation that needs to be fixed. > > If it isn't, it would be great to have a different flag we could use > in the domain router to do what I'm intending here. I can't be the > only person who would find it useful, haha. It would just map domain - >> app, always leave out the app name in the URL, and not allow access > to other apps. > > And unfortunately I'm using wsgi, and I have no idea how I would go > about setting up your separate application directory idea. If anybody > DOES know, I'm all ears. =) > > On Aug 17, 10:46 pm, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Aug 17, 2011, at 4:29 PM, vapirix wrote: >> >>> That would be truly excellent. >> >>> It would change the way I do a lot of stuff. Right now I am forced to >>> use php for a lot of small little apps that I don't want to surrender >>> an entire web2py install for. =D >> >> The problem is that exclusive_domain is enforced for URL(), but not for >> incoming requests. That's actually how it's documented: >> >>> # exclusive_domain: If True (default is False), an exception is raised if >>> an attempt is made to generate >>> # an outgoing URL with a different application without >>> providing an explicit host. >> >> It's easy to extend to incoming apps, but I'd like to be sure of the rule >> that gets enforced. I think the rule should be: if exclusive_domain is True >> for a given app (either because it's set True in the base router or in an >> app-specific router), then that app will only recognized if the incoming >> domain (and possibly port) matches one mapped to that app in the domains >> dictionary. If it doesn't match, we'd raise a 400 invalid request/invalid >> application error. >> >> BTW, you can share a web2py installation across completely separate app >> installs, by creating a separate applications/ directory for each app, and >> starting web2py with the --folder option, once for each app. I'm not sure >> how you'd configure wsgi for this kind of thing, but it'd be easy enough (I >> think) with mod_proxy. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Aug 17, 4:01 pm, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Sounds like a bug in exclusive_domain. I'll look at it when I get home >>>> later. >> >>>> On Aug 17, 2011, at 12:57 PM, vapirix <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>> OR can maybe somebody point me in a different direction to achieve the >>>>> same thing without a hilariously complicated config process that I >>>>> won't want to do every time? =) >> >>>>> On Aug 16, 5:07 pm, vapirix <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> So I'm attempting to set up the usage scenario of: >> >>>>>> domain1.com -> load app 1 >>>>>> domain2.com -> load app 2 >>>>>> etc. etc. >> >>>>>> I need domain1 to NOT have access to app 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. >> >>>>>> That all works using the router's "domain" settings. Obviously you run >>>>>> into the problem of: domain1.com loads app1, but domain1.com/app2 >>>>>> loading app2, so I use "exclusive_domain = True", and then I have to >>>>>> do domain1.com/app1/ to load the app without raising an exception, >>>>>> which seems counter productive. Besides that, even with >>>>>> exclusive_domain = True, I can do domain1.com/app2 to load the second >>>>>> app. Is there any way to do what I'm attempting to do here? I'd rather >>>>>> not have to set up separate web2py installs for the tons of tiny apps >>>>>> I do for my clients that get 1 hit every 6 months. >> >>>>>> What can I do here, friends?
