| msg38907 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2002-02-08 21:39 |
| This patch adds HTTP*Connection classes for proxy connections. Authenticated proxies are also supported. One can argue urllib2 already implements this. It does not do HTTPS tunneling through proxies, and this is intended to be lower-level than urllib2. |
|
|
| msg38908 - (view) |
Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) *  |
Date: 2002-03-01 22:40 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=6380 This patch fails to seduce me. There's no explanation why this would be useful, or how it should be used, and no documentation, and a hint that urllib2 already does this. Maybe you can get someone who's known on python-dev to champion it, if you think it's useful? |
|
|
| msg38909 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2002-03-01 22:58 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=205865 I will add documentation and show the intended usage. urllib* doesn't deal with proxying over SSL (using CONNECT instead of GET/POST). urllib* also use the compatibility classes, HTTP/HTTPS, instead of HTTPConnection (this is not an argument by itself). Thanks for the suggestion. |
|
|
| msg38910 - (view) |
Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * |
Date: 2002-03-01 23:12 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=6380 OK, thanks; I'll wait! |
|
|
| msg38911 - (view) |
Author: Jeremy Hylton (jhylton)  |
Date: 2002-06-11 18:42 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=31392 misa-- any progress on this patch? |
|
|
| msg38912 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2002-06-11 18:47 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=205865 Sorry, been caught with a zillion of other things to do. I'll try to reorganize it somehow and ask for opinions. |
|
|
| msg38913 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2002-06-24 03:03 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=205865 The newer patch is generated against the latest CVS tree, and it provides additional documentation. |
|
|
| msg38914 - (view) |
Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * |
Date: 2002-07-12 15:46 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=6380 Assigning to Jeremy in the hope that he can provide a review. |
|
|
| msg38915 - (view) |
Author: Jeremy Hylton (jhylton) |
Date: 2002-07-15 20:52 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=31392 I'll take a look. |
|
|
| msg38916 - (view) |
Author: Jeremy Hylton (jhylton) |
Date: 2002-07-15 21:21 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=31392 The proposed classes seem useful enough, but I would like to make several suggestions for the implementation. - There are too many comments. Comments should only be added when the intent of the code needs to be explained. We definitely don't need one comment for each line of code. The comment in the HTTPS proxy putrequest() is an example of a helpful comment. - Just use a single underscore for private variables. - Please use string methods instead of the string module. - I don't understand the logic of switching the host/port back and forth. |
|
|
| msg38917 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2002-07-15 21:37 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=205865 - I agree about the comments. I'll make them reasonable. - one underscore is fine - I intended to have a patch that works with python 1.5, but then again the module itself doesn't run with 1.5 anyway, so good point. - When you make a connection to a server through a proxy, you have to connect to the proxy, but everything else should be the same, i.e. the Host: field has to refer to the server and so on. I wanted to reuse the code from _set_hostport, which saves the host and port in self.host, self.port. Had to do it twice, once for the proxy hostname, once for the server's. _set_hostport takes care of the default port and of the "hostname:port" syntax, which is convenient. I'll put together a patched patch and upload it. |
|
|
| msg38918 - (view) |
Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2002-10-07 21:17 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=21627 misa, is a patch forthcoming? |
|
|
| msg38919 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2002-10-07 21:20 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=205865 Boy, two months. Yes, I'll go back to working on the patch. Sorry for the delay. |
|
|
| msg38920 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2002-11-05 20:56 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=205865 I am having problems with proxying and keepalive connections. Setting to a lower priority until I figure out the documentation. |
|
|
| msg38921 - (view) |
Author: Isaac Salsberg (isalsberg) |
Date: 2002-12-15 00:52 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=663978 To make this patch work with the "buggy" IIS using python 2.2 or 2.2.1 with https, You need to install also these 2 patches: 551273 (fix httplib bug with 100 Continue) and 500311 (work around for buggy https servers) Python 2.2.2 by the other hand, has already incorparated those two patches, so You only need to add the HTTP{S} (515003) proxy patch. But since httplib has changed, Misa's diff file will fail. I have created a diff file that works with python 2.2.2, which also includes a new example that works using a certificate file in PEM format. I wanted to attach the file, however I could not find out how :-( |
|
|
| msg38922 - (view) |
Author: Neal Norwitz (nnorwitz) * |
Date: 2002-12-15 02:09 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=33168 Isaac, I don't believe SF allows you to attach a file to someone else's patch. Please submit a new patch. In the comments for the new patch refer to this patch and indicate if it supercedes this patch (ie, should this patch be closed). Also, it would be nice if you can add a comment to this patch mentioning the new patch number. Thanks! |
|
|
| msg38923 - (view) |
Author: Isaac Salsberg (isalsberg) |
Date: 2002-12-20 01:54 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=663978 Neal, taht's right, I can not attach a file. I don't think is a good idea to close this patch, because Misa is still working on it to fix some persistence issue. The version I created is based on the current Misa's version, so it has the same persistence problem. It just was adapted to be used with Python 2.2.2. So we need to wait for Misa's final version. I sent the patch to Misa, in case he wants to atach it here meanwhile the last version arrives. Except for persistence, It is working for me in a production environment. Anyway, If You need the patch I can send it. Just give me an email address. |
|
|
| msg38924 - (view) |
Author: Neal Norwitz (nnorwitz) * |
Date: 2003-01-01 19:52 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=33168 Isaac, can you send me the patch? nnorwitz@users.sf.net should work |
|
|
| msg38925 - (view) |
Author: Neal Norwitz (nnorwitz) * |
Date: 2003-01-11 01:15 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=33168 Uploading patch from Isaac Salsberg. I removed some more comments. Jeremy (or Martin) can you review this. If it's read, I can check it in. There still needs to be a doc and tests. I'll check if either of the old patches has any. |
|
|
| msg38926 - (view) |
Author: Greg Stein (gstein) * |
Date: 2003-11-01 00:25 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=6501 Eek. Following this model, then when we want to add Basic authentication support, then we'll have the following classes: HTTPBasicConnection HTTPSBasicConnection HTTPBasicProxyConnection HTTPSBasicProxyConnection Oh, and what if we want Digest support? Another set of four? But what if we want the connection to support *both* Basic or Digest, depending upon how the server was configured? Let's not forget the client certificates. Oh, and layering DAV capability on this. The point is: adding features by adding classes will produce a combinatoric nightmare. While I certainly agree with the idea of pushing proxy support "down" from urllib(2) into the basic http classes, I'd rather see a design that doesn't require a new class for every feature combination. PEP 268 was the start of an attempt to rationalize the various features around HTTP. Some of the basic feature sets to support: * SSL * various forms of authentication (Basic, Digest, client cert, ...) * WebDAV * Proxy * Proxy auth I'd much rather see proxy features folded right into the connection classes, than to spawn new ones. Even better, I'd suggest picking up PEP 268 and modifying it where "you" (whoever might read this comment) disagree or have further design ideas. (IOW, count me a -1 to the approach suggested by this patch) |
|
|
| msg38927 - (view) |
Author: Mihai Ibanescu (misa) |
Date: 2003-11-03 14:58 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=205865 Greg, I agree. I am not proud of the patch anymore - it is a nightmare to maintain. I'll have a look at PEP 268 and explore some other possiblities. So, it's ok with me to close this as WONTFIX until we come up with something better. |
|
|
| msg38928 - (view) |
Author: Isaac Salsberg (isalsberg) |
Date: 2003-11-04 20:32 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=663978 Perhaps the patch is not using the best possible model, however is the only python code available that works FINE with proxies using HTTPS. It has been working for me for almost a year. Thank you Misa, if you develop another version, please let me know. |
|
|