Re: Zope 2 WSGI investigation
Sylvain Viollon <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.zope.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Op 9 jan 2012, om 12:44 heeft Marius Gedminas het volgende geschreven: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 10:01:29AM +0100, Sylvain Viollon wrote: >> >> You can't set a virtual path with the Host header, it is not valid >> if you want to follow the RFC. After as well, you can include the >> port in it, but I think you are not sure if you can't really know >> if you should create https URL or not, you don't have this >> information (this is not required only to be on port 443, and if it >> is I am not even sure the port is correctly added in the Host >> header). > > In the WSGI world it's usual to use the X-Forwarded-Scheme header to > determine the scheme (http or https), AFAIU. > I have nothing against using those headers, even if there disparities between some of the implementations. > See e.g. http://pythonpaste.org/wsgiproxy/#the-proxy > http://pythonpaste.org/deploy/modules/config.html#paste.deploy.config.PrefixMiddleware > http://packages.python.org/Deliverance/proxy.html > http://docs.pylonsproject.org/projects/pyramid_cookbook/en/latest/deployment/nginx.html > Regards, Sylvain, -- Sylvain Viollon -- Infrae t +31 10 243 7051 -- http://infrae.com Hoevestraat 10 3033GC Rotterdam -- The Netherlands _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [email protected] https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )