I don't feel strongly about it -- I was simply responding to Geir's request that we have an option to test against a remote server. I think we can have that option if people want to.
Regards, Tim Anton Luht wrote: > Good day, > >> I assume that we can have a test script config file to define the server >> location. We can have the default mode be starting the Jetty server on >> localhost (a.k.a. 'airplane mode' <g>), then if you want to run the >> server remotely the tests config would have to be updated... > > It seems to me that remote server is not requires in HTTP tests. The > only difference between local HTTP server and the remote one is that > the first is reached via loopback and the latter - via "real" net. > Testing of network connections is out of scope of HTTP functionality > tests so local server shoud be enough. > > Remote server has obvious drawbacks: > - if we compare in tests data fetched by via HTTP to some expected > result, it's likely that contents of remote site (say, apache.org) > will change and tests will fail > - some companies and providers don't allow to connect from internal > network to the Internet directly - 'telnet ... 80' will fail. The > direct connection functionality cannot be tested in this environment. > > Remote server is not required even for proxy tests - Jetty can be > configured to run as proxy server. > > The only problem with local server is choosing a local port to bind to > - port 80 is often used by another daemon. Test should try to start > Jetty on a free port and tell its number to the URLConnection test. > > My opinion is that remote server should not be used in tests - it's > problematic and doesn't give any advantages. > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
