Binding HTTP clients calls to specific interface

Hi, Alexander.
Do you talk about calls from different boxes?
It is quite simple to modify http library to do so.
1. Inject additional arg into http_start_request()
    (rewrite current calls to use NULL for this arg)
2. Add to structure HTTPserver field octstr *outgoing_interface.
3. In get_connection() use http_interface only if *outgoing_interface not NULL.

If you think it is useful, I can do it.
But anyway, for using it, corresponded boxes must be tuned to use
http_start_request with real interface, not NULL.

Alexander Malysh wrote:
 > On Thursday 18 December 2003 13:22, Vjacheslav Chekushin wrote:
 >
 >>Hi, Alexandr.
 >>I didn't get your point. How do you want to choose with
 >>each interface to call http_start_request? Is it just round-robin?
 >
 >
 > nope, it would be specified explicitely, i.e.
 > http_start_request(...params..., interface)
 >
 >
 >>I can show you why I using this patch (simplified):
 >>My host has 2 interfaces - into intranet and into internet.
 >>What I want is to allow wap user go to internet only.
 >>So I bind http requests to external interface and that is all.
 >>Requests can't go to intranet now.
 >
 >
 > ok, I got your point... But assume you would like additionaly to allow for
 > some user requests to go into intranet (password/username/msidn protected),
 > then you have no chance todo that on this wapbox because all http request
 > would go through internet interface.
 >
 >
 >>Alexander Malysh wrote:
 >>
 >>>Hi Slava,
 >>>
 >>>just a question: your patch sets http-interface static for the whole
 >>>process (http-interface). Would it make sense to set 'interface' for each
 >>>http request (i.e. by calling http_start_request with wished interface) ?
 >>>
 >>>e.g. one application with 2 threads: first thread starts http request
 >>>through eth0 and second thread through eth1. such is impossible with
 >>>attached patch or I'm missing something?
 >>>
 >>>On Thursday 18 December 2003 09:13, Vjacheslav Chekushin wrote:
 >>>
 >>>>Hi, Alexander.
 >>>>
 >>>>I've included update to userguide.
 >>>>Could you check, is it enough?
 >>>>
 >>>>Alexander Malysh wrote:
 >>>>
 >>>>>On Tuesday 16 December 2003 13:53, Vjacheslav Chekushin wrote:
 >>>>>
 >>>>>>Hi, Alexander.
 >>>>>>
 >>>>>>The problem is that I haven't write access to CVS ;).
 >>>>>
 >>>>>oops, I thought you have write access...
 >>>>>would you please add new option to userguide and resend a whole patch. I
 >>>>>will commit it then.
 >>>>>
 >>>>>Thanks in advance...
 >>>>>
 >>>>>
 >>>>>>Alexander Malysh wrote:
 >>>>>>
 >>>>>>>Hi Slava,
 >>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>as a known open-source-process , no votes/comments are equal to +0 ,
 >>>>>>>so you as a one that have write access should just commit things,
 >>>>>>>because some time for review by others elapsed and no vetos are
 >>>>>>>there.
 >>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>Only one comment from me: I'm +1 for this patch , but please add this
 >>>>>>>new config option to userguide. We _must_ keep userguide uptodate.
 >>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>On Tuesday 16 December 2003 13:00, Vjacheslav Chekushin wrote:
 >>>>>>
 >


-- 
Vjacheslav Chekushin                                mailto:[email protected]
Latvian Mobile Phone Company                        http://www.lmt.lv
Network Support and Information Technology Group    +371 7773436
                                                     +371 9248284 (mobile)
-- 
Vjacheslav Chekushin                                mailto:[email protected]
Latvian Mobile Phone Company                        http://www.lmt.lv
Network Support and Information Technology Group    +371 7773436
                                                     +371 9248284 (mobile)