On 9/18/06, Vlad Seryakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
More code i meant to implement the whole full-blown proxy, was not clear. As for activation, this is how the core works, everything is a callback using url-specific hash entry
Yeah, and I'm saying it's broken because the HTTP 1.1 spec says that normal clients, *not* expecting to be talking to a proxy, are supposed to send the full protocol and host. In our code, that will activate a *proxy* callback, but it should just be a a normal HTTP response for whatever the server has for that URL At least, that's how I read the RFC. That's why I say that although adding Tcl access to this stuff is good, it's going in the wrong direction by exposing a buggy implementation. The concept of the current (before you) code is also weak, due to the need to register a callback for each and every method to be proxied. Because this has never been exposed to Tcl before, and because seems to be (to me) a genuine bug which could bight us as we add more HTTP 1.1 support, it seems like now would be the time to take a step back and look at what we really want in this API. It's only one call to register, one to unregister, and some Tcl wrappers. Do you think it's not worth it?
so current proxy implementation works the same way, just using protocol/method instead of method/url for regular HTTP. So i am not sure if we need to re-write this.
