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
Current implementation of proxy server replies with
4.02 Bad Option
Unsafe options in request: URI_PORT
when a client makes a request through it specifying the port it wants to use.
Is there any rationale behind treating URI_PORT as a not-known option in proxy.server.raise_unless_safe?
Adding URI_PORT to the set of known options lets the request reach the desired server and the final response arrive to the client.
Example:
# Server listening on 172.17.0.26:5683
./server.py
# Reverse Proxy listening on 172.17.0.46:6666, forwards requests to the server above
./coap-proxy --reverse --server-address 172.17.0.46 --server-port 6666 --pathbased "xyz":"172.17.0.26"
# Client on 172.17.0.27, requests to the proxy server
./coap-client -v coap://172.17.0.46:6666/xyz/time
4.02 Bad Option
Unsafe options in request: URI_PORT
Adding URI_PORT to the set of known options in proxy.server.raise_unless_safe lets the client get the expected reply from the server:
# Same setup as above
./coap-client.py -v coap://172.17.0.46:6666/xyz/time
2015-07-24 12:39
(No newline at end of message)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Current implementation of proxy server replies with
when a client makes a request through it specifying the port it wants to use.
Is there any rationale behind treating URI_PORT as a not-known option in
proxy.server.raise_unless_safe
?Adding URI_PORT to the set of known options lets the request reach the desired server and the final response arrive to the client.
Example:
# Server listening on 172.17.0.26:5683 ./server.py
Adding URI_PORT to the set of known options in
proxy.server.raise_unless_safe
lets the client get the expected reply from the server:# Same setup as above ./coap-client.py -v coap://172.17.0.46:6666/xyz/time 2015-07-24 12:39 (No newline at end of message)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: