geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ashish Jain <ashja...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Configuring front end host for axis2 web services
Date Fri, 11 Feb 2011 06:54:03 GMT
Hi David,

Your bit on configuring the header can be another way. We can use a standard
header name for this for example FrontEnd-Proxy-HostPort or may be some
other name. HTTP Server provides a directive where custom headers can be
appended to the requests.
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/mod/mod_headers.html#requestheader

I am very much hopeful that other HTTP servers will also provide a way to
configure custom headers.
So this option is also very much acceptable.

Thanks
Ashish

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:44 PM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>wrote:

> Hi Ashish,
>
> I was certainly thinking of X-Forwarded-Host.  I'm not clear on whether
> this header includes the original port.  Google hasn't shown me much info on
> how other people deal with this problem.  I did find
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/mod/mod_proxy.html#proxypreservehost
>
> which appears to indicate you can configure apache httpd to not introduce
> this problem in the first place.
>
> I can see that directly configuring the host would be useful in some
> circumstances, but I think it would be easier in more circumstances to be
> able to configure the header name for the original host.
>
> So I guess you are right and directly configuring the host is the best
> solution for now.  I'll let you know if I can find any more information on
> this.
>
> thanks!
> david jencks
>
> On Feb 10, 2011, at 6:28 AM, Ashish Jain wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> I am not sure if we can use the request object. The request
> (org.apache.geronimo.webservices.WebServiceContainer.Request) object gives
> you the address for the remote host which is the address for the proxy
> server, however no information on the port. Another way could have been to
> utilize the header "request.getHeader("X-Forwarded-Host")" but this is not a
> standard header AFAIK. So this option can also to be ruled out. So I think
> modifying the schema is the best way ahead.
>
> Thanks
> Ashish
>
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Ashish Jain <ashjain2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks David and Jarek. I am investigating on the comment made by David
>> and seems to have found some headers which are being appended by HTTP
>> server. I will investigate further in this direction to find out if the
>> request object can be used to attain this.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Ashish
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:06 AM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Changing the schema like this shouldn't be a problem if its necessary.
>>>  I'd like to understand better why its necessary.  Perhaps there's another
>>> way.
>>>
>>> I thought that the way this was coded was that the host and port from the
>>> incoming request were stuffed into the wsdl being returned.  Doesn't the
>>> proxy server tell us what the original request was in some way such as a
>>> request attribute?  Could we look for that information and use it if
>>> available and use the request itself if not?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>> On Feb 7, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
>>>
>>> > Ashish,
>>> >
>>> > Modifying the schema (without changing the namespace) is fine as long
>>> > as you make the new element(s) optional. That at least is what we have
>>> > done in the past.
>>> >
>>> > Jarek
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Ashish Jain <ashjain2@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>
>>> >> When geronimo is front ended with a proxy say Apache HTTP server and
a
>>> web
>>> >> service is invoked via this proxy. The auto
>>> >> generated wsdl will have the soap:address as
>>> >> http://<g_host>:<g_port>/service_name. Instead it should
be
>>> >> http://<proxy_host>:
>>> >> <proxy:port>/service_name. The method which takes care of all
this is
>>> >> org.apache.geronimo.axis2.WSDLQueryHandler.writeResponse
>>> >> . The baseUri attribute in the class has to be modified so that
>>> appropriate
>>> >> soap:address can be written in the wsdl file.
>>> >>
>>> >> So as to get this property into geronimo one of the way would be to
be
>>> able
>>> >> to specify in geronimo deployment descriptor.
>>> >> Adding a new attribute may require schema change.
>>> >>
>>> >> Is this acceptable? Are there any other alternative ways through which
>>> this
>>> >> can be achieved?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >> Ashish
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message