Ignacio J. Ortega wrote: >> De: Bojan Smojver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Enviado el: 28 de agosto de 2002 15:27 >> Para: Tomcat Dev List >> Asunto: Spec question: RE BUG 12052 > >> of load balancers and firewalls, so it is unrealistic to expect to >> return port numbers that it doesn't know about. What do you think? >> >> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12052 >> >> Other opinions welcome :-) > > Nice!!! this bug has surfaced many times in the past, in tc 3.2, 3.3, at > least :)), and related or not to connectors.. :).. and i think the first > poster on this topic was me long time ago, in late 2000.. :)))).. > > The port MUST be the one in the Host Header if one is present,and should > be present if the request is HTTP1.1 compliant, if no port is present > the port must be 80 o 443, regardless of the socket port, that NEVER > must be a default for getServerPort, NEVER.. and regardless of the > channel which has be used to forward the request to the container.. > socket,JNI,. or whatever..
You're right. If the request is HTTP/1.0 or HTTP/0.9 - then the best choice is to use host and port that apache received the request on. IF any proxy server is used - I think the HTTP spec implies that it requires it to include a Host header if none is present. Costin > > > Saludos , > Ignacio J. Ortega > > >> -----Mensaje original----- >> >> >> Craig, >> >> I think this bug report is invalid, since Tomcat/Apache has >> no knowledge >> >> Bojan >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
