From: Omar Polo Subject: Re: gotwebd: what if listen was a top-level setting? Cc: gameoftrees@openbsd.org Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 14:52:00 +0200 On 2024/05/16 20:46:44 +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 07:13:27PM +0200, Omar Polo wrote: > > gotwebd already sits behind an http server, by design, so it's less > > important to filter the domains here. It would also simplify the > > configuration. The unix_socket_name option can be romevod, as now it is > > just `listen on socket "..."`. > > Couldn't removal of unix_socket_name be a separate diff/commit? > Not very important, just wondering why it got mixed in with changing > the scope of the listen statement. sure, i have committed the unix_socket_name in a separate commit. > > How many are sharing the same gotwebd instance between different hosts > > and don't trust their frontend http server to not filter virtual-hosts? > > Do we care about this use-case? (I'm propending to not care.) > > Agreed, http servers will already use a host header or request path > in order to decide whether to forward a request to gotwebd. > > > To make things clearer: gotwebd already works like this. It only looks > > at the server name (i.e. the Host header in the request) and has done so > > since when it was imported. My proposed diff just makes this more > > obvious from the config file too. > > Ok by me, thanks. Thanks!