You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
#6803 added relativeURIs config to determine if relative or absolute URI will be used in the request as a feature parity with Helidon SE. However, proxy configuration also needs to be a factor in deciding on the form of URI to send. Particularly, when you use proxy, Helidon SE WebClient will use absolute URI in the request because of changes made in #2302 and #3438. The use of absolute URI was implemented because of section 5.1.2 Request-URI in https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html which states:
The absoluteURI form is REQUIRED when the request is being made to a proxy.
Because of this, we need to replicate this behavior in Helidon NIMA. However, NIMA proxy implementation is still in the works in #6006, so this change will have to wait.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Since #6006Nima: WebClient Proxy Support is a prerequisite of this change and that issue is slated for 4.0.0-M2, then I'm setting this to that milestone as well.
klustria
changed the title
Include Proxy setting when deciding relativeURIs logic
Include Proxy setting as part of deciding relativeURIs logic
Jun 8, 2023
Environment Details
Problem Description
#6803 added relativeURIs config to determine if relative or absolute URI will be used in the request as a feature parity with Helidon SE. However, proxy configuration also needs to be a factor in deciding on the form of URI to send. Particularly, when you use proxy, Helidon SE WebClient will use absolute URI in the request because of changes made in #2302 and #3438. The use of absolute URI was implemented because of section 5.1.2 Request-URI in https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html which states:
Because of this, we need to replicate this behavior in Helidon NIMA. However, NIMA proxy implementation is still in the works in #6006, so this change will have to wait.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: