hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject ClientPNames.VIRTUAL_HOST parameter behaviour - code or docn bug?
Date Tue, 17 May 2011 17:05:03 GMT
The documentation for ClientPNames.VIRTUAL_HOST says it:

defines the virtual host name to be used in the <literal>Host</literal>
header instead of the physical host name. This parameter expects a value of
type <classname>HttpHost</classname>.

In HC3.1, AFAICT the equivalent to this parameter is the  method
HttpMethodParams.setVirtualHost(String hostname), which only accepts a
String for the hostname. The HC3.1 code automatically appends the
appropriate port for the connection if required (it does not append
:80 for http requests). Which is fine.

However in HC4, AFAICT the HttpHost is used exactly as is when
generating the Host header - the correct port has to be provided in
the HttpHost instance (or omitted in the default case). Also the
documentation of the VIRTUAL_HOST parameter does not mention anything
about needing to set the port - it only mentions the hostname.

So is the documentation correct? i.e. should the code automatically
add the correct port number to the generated Host header? Or is the
code correct, in which case the documentation needs to be updated. If
the existing code is correct, then I think it would make sense to
provide a helper method to create an HttpHost instance with the
correct port value.

S.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org


Mime
View raw message