Yes - our mails crossed - quite some change between earlier drafts and the final RFC2616 which has little guidance for proxies.
Dw. -- Dirk-Willem van Gulik On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Chuck Murcko wrote: > For HTTP 1.1 you should use the Host: urlhost[:urlport] form. AFAICS > these are the simplest possible proxy requests: > > HTTP 1.0: > GET http://www.ibm.com/ HTTP/1.0 > <cr><cr> > > HTTP 1.1: > GET http://www.ibm.com/ HTTP/1.1 > Host: www.ibm.com > <cr><cr> > > Chuck > > On Friday, March 29, 2002, at 02:41 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Actually: > > > >> The problem I'm encountering is that ab(1) generates Host: header > >> pointing to proxy server instead of real destination host. > >> Due to this behavior, proxy server (not mod_proxy, BTW) is failing > >> to send a valid HTTP request to destintion webserver using name-based > >> virtualhost, as it simply passes Host: header with its (proxy > >> server's) hostname in it. > > > > I am double checking the spec. To verify what exactly should be send - > > as > > one could also have to consider a proxy on a vhost. > > > > To summarize, in the case of a PROXY we have > > > > proxyhost + proxyport > > full URL (http://urlhost:urlport/foo) (or ftp, etc) > > > > and we do > > > > connect to proxyhost, proxyport > > then say 'GET full-URL HTTP...' > > > > And now the question is, do we do > > > > Host: proxyhost [:proxyport] > > or > > Host: urlhost[:urlport] > > or > > <nil> (i.e. explictly NO Host:). > > > > Dw > > > >
