httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Hartill <hart...@ooo.lanl.gov>
Subject Re: custom error responses revistited
Date Tue, 28 Mar 1995 11:48:36 GMT
> 
> 
> > Re: the problem with relative URLs - isn't the fix to simply force
> > people to use BASE when redirecting to a local url. 
> > Should/can apache add a BASE header to redirected URLs ? - it could
> > cause problems if the document also produces a BASE either as a header
> > or in the <HEAD></HEAD>
> > 
> > 
> > robh
> 
> Er, I dun't like the idea of forcing people to put anything, BASE or otherwise,
> in their scripts.  Isn't the real solution top just make the server log
> both the name of the accessing URL and the URL it redirects to?
> 
> Making the server fudge by adding a mandatory BASE header of its own is lame
> [and I have the mathematical proof!].

I agree there, but the problem is nothing to do with logging. The problem
is that a client asks for "X" but gets "Y" instead. If Y has relative
urls, then the client makes them relative to X. If Y explicitly gives
a BASE, the problem is gone. If the server adds BASE, then things could
get hairy if the server and Y disagree over where the BASE url is.

-=-=

Logging both the original and redirected URL sounds sensible, I suspect
it's an easy thing to do... prior to any redirect, one logs the current
URL and marks it with a 302. The final logging should then refer to the
new url, with a 200 (or appropriate response).



Mime
View raw message