> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Bojan Smojver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Enviado el: 29 de agosto de 2002 1:46
> Para: Tomcat Dev List
> Asunto: Re: Spec question: RE BUG 12052
>
>
>
> ----------------
> AP_DECLARE(apr_port_t) ap_get_server_port(const request_rec *r)
> {
> apr_port_t port;
> core_dir_config *d =
> (core_dir_config *)ap_get_module_config(r->per_dir_config,
> &core_module);
>
> if (d->use_canonical_name == USE_CANONICAL_NAME_OFF
> || d->use_canonical_name == USE_CANONICAL_NAME_DNS) {
>
> /* With UseCanonicalName off Apache will form self-referential
> * URLs using the hostname and port supplied by the client if
> * any are supplied (otherwise it will use the
> canonical name).
> */
> port = r->parsed_uri.port ? r->parsed_uri.port :
> r->server->port ? r->server->port :
> ap_default_port(r);
>From the comment it seems to say, that Apache will get the port form
client supplied infos, and in the rfc2616(5.2) says that if the request
uri is relative ( i think actual clients only produce relative uris )
the host+port SHOULD be readed from the Host header..
So, i dont see any contradiction here, Apache2 does the rights thing
too.. at least with the port, for sure the servername will be the same..
>
> This doesn't seem like coming from headers, but rather from URL or as
> indicated by the server itself. What do you think?
>
We know how r->parsed_uri.port gets his value? but for sure Apache is
following the HTTP rfc 5.2.. reading it from Host header if needed
(raletive uris), if not it's a bug in Apache2 ( 2 days to be
sufficiently daring to say that :)
All of that if you USE_CANONICAL_NAME_OFF, but is the default, i think.
Saludos ,
Ignacio J. Ortega
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
