On Jan 7, 2011, at 1:56 PM, VP wrote: > > Thanks. > What if I have something like this: > > example1.com /app1/controller1 > example1.net /app1/controller2 > > How would this translate into this new syntax?
I've been thinking about this one a little more, and I see a problem. When we rewrite outgoing URLs (in either the old or new system), we don't know what the domain is. That's a problem, because the browser is going to interpret the outgoing URL in the context of the domain used for the request that generated it. The existing logic makes the assumption that an outgoing URL addressed to /app1/controller1 can only occur as a response to a request to example1.com, and it will strip /app1/controller1 from the URL. This means that an application *must not* use URL() for a reference to one of the above default controllers unless the originating request was through the matching domain. There's a similar problem with accessing domain-mapped applications. Unless I've missed something....
