Op 8 jan 2012, om 16:36 heeft Laurence Rowe het volgende geschreven:

> On 3 January 2012 08:34, Sylvain Viollon <sylv...@infrae.com> wrote:
>> Op 1 jan 2012, om 20:39 heeft Martin Aspeli het volgende geschreven:


>>> * Supports simplified virtual hosting with X-VHM-Host
>>  That is not completely true. I support setting the hostname, however to set 
>> a
>> virtual path, you need to do this during traversing, which is done in 
>> BaseRequest,
>> that I don't change (because it is a big large blob of code where you cannot 
>> really plug anything in it, or
>> change only a few line in it without changing everything).
>>  In production we use mod_rewrite to rewrite the URL with an old
>> VirtualHostMonster url and pass it to mod_wsgi with the help of the flags PT.
> What advantage is there to setting the X-VHM-Host header over just
> setting the Host header?

   You can't set a virtual path with the Host header, it is not valid if you 
want to follow the RFC.
   After as well, you can include the port in it, but I think you are not sure 
if you can't really know
   if you should create https URL or not, you don't have this information (this 
is not required
   only to be on port 443, and if it is I am not even sure the port is 
correctly added in the Host

   I think it would be safer to have a separate header for all this 
information, and not touching
   the Host headers, that applications might expect to be correct.




Sylvain Viollon -- Infrae
t +31 10 243 7051 -- http://infrae.com
Hoevestraat 10 3033GC Rotterdam -- The Netherlands

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to