Re: [Potluck] a lightweight web framework

[Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com>]

hi Daniel!
First, I must appreciate for your encourage! That makes me happier
though I'm still weak and headache. ;-)

On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 14:14 +0800, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> On 17 February 2013 13:03, Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > PS: and I have to mention that bug, I believe it's a bug.
> >
> > When the server-handler get the request, I found the uri in request have
> > no 'host', it's #f. It causes trouble for me to implement url redirect
> > mechanism, which used to implement admin authentication.
> > I do think uri should keep 'host' value because it's useful for later.
> > And it's OK for 'read-request-line', it'll parse and store 'host'
> > correctly.
> 
> Most HTTP requests will *not* include an absolute URI.  Instead, the
> request line contains only the path.  This is not a bug.
> 

> There is a header, host, that can be used to fill in the blank /if it
> is present/.  Doing this automatically in the web module is too
> prescriptive; instead, each server should do this for itself as it
> deems appropriate.  Also, I would just inspect the host header
> directly and *never* manipulate the Request-URI.
> 
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-5.1.2>
> 
> The host header is typically used by a reverse proxy or virtual host
> provider to dispatch to the appropriate site handler/module, which
> (usually) should not care what its hostname is.
> 
> >
> > I think there's some link in the inner server module, which dropped
> > 'host' value or created a new uri and throw the old-correct one.
> > Any comments?
> 
> What makes you think that?
> 

Well, I thought 'host' should be kept, and 'read-request-line' works, so
I guess it was dropped somewhere.

OK, if it's not a bug, I think I should avoid to run build-request
again, but modify the original uri an pass the original request. Since
it'll check the validity, it throw error if 'host' is #f. Is that
accepted?

> >
> >
> > Sorry again for the half-baked work, it looks no cool. But I've ever
> > planed a perfect one... :-(
> >
> 
> Lets see it get finished then :-)
> 
> Regards