Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hc-httpclient-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hc-httpclient-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B02D510C7B for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:24:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 51235 invoked by uid 500); 22 Jan 2015 12:24:04 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hc-httpclient-users-archive@hc.apache.org Received: (qmail 51191 invoked by uid 500); 22 Jan 2015 12:24:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact httpclient-users-help@hc.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "HttpClient User Discussion" Delivered-To: mailing list httpclient-users@hc.apache.org Received: (qmail 51179 invoked by uid 99); 22 Jan 2015 12:24:03 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:24:03 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of namasrihari@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.50 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.50] (HELO mail-pa0-f50.google.com) (209.85.220.50) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:23:58 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id rd3so684681pab.9 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 04:21:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=VFCd+3a5IapKq+MN6b1ZPA6fk1yueY+XyXcp9AbeG8A=; b=x8JgOOel7uBObZNvVkpyYTalIcj+iLLBcisKu3BFqshr/7Hap4Rd307iv79CAaev9g hqJwTZt02rZuj9OSDDyv2hay2G8UodOU4bKxjlpWiSFBggjYS4O1LEib35XkrQZJ1G3R qdaRd3PUAFpS7p6N6JEQahLhsIKwjgLC+vFg/UQXFNRop0OELJLkb07YRnTO0GxTe7bu 4IR44raIfJLJmeOrdydJ30J6Rs6Fi7OpsKriKKceuP7jB34gRVui6Zz866sbbYNDMMUg RHhyVfIu8aQ1G/qq3aEz1Iv6wWz8rYRdZdS1lFas5rANLgjHYVelwrQS+T9aYViz8b9C GB+A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.70.101.136 with SMTP id fg8mr1604760pdb.65.1421929282854; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 04:21:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.72.97 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 04:21:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17:51:22 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Custom SSL Scheme Registry using HTTPClientContext From: srihari na To: HttpClient User Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b675974cce6b7050d3cb5ed X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b675974cce6b7050d3cb5ed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Team, I have posted on this topic many times in this forum and from our recent responses in the forum I have more question in the area of custom ssl context. Based on the suggestions I am exploring the 4.3.6 APIs to resolve my concern which I posted in this forum with title : "Custom SchemeRegistry via local context not working". From the new APIs i see the following way to establish a custom scheme registry and corresponding concerns while using those mechanisms. 1. Use a custom client and set scheme registry - We are using HC as our core component where performance with time and memory is important, with this technique we have to build the client and associate connection manager and run it. For every request a new client has to be built. 2. Creating a registry and associate the registry with connection manager - Our product follows a multi tenant architecture where each tenant will have their own schemes and I could not figure our adding entries to registry dynamically. Again performance and Isolation is concern. HttpClientContext has options to set many configuration details except for SchemeRegistry. Is there any mechanism to add the schemes to registry dynamically without needing to build registry or client and during the execute call select the uniquely identified scheme(by name) for the request. We are eager to know your suggestions on this scenario. -- Regards, Srihari NA --047d7b675974cce6b7050d3cb5ed--