We are trying to write a iRule for the BIG-IP universal persistence module.
Our mission is to extract and persist from a HTTP response payload/body an application unique identifier (something like a seesionid for us).
Then use it in a consecutive HTTP requests.
Note, this unique identifier return in text/xml/soap-xml response formats and there is no cookie involve here.
We're having problem to write the TCL code for the extraction of our custom unique identifier from the HTTP response payload/body.
We have checked these manuals and did not find example for this kind of functionality:
https://devcentral.f5.com/wiki/iRules.HTTP_RESPONSE.ashx
https://devcentral.f5.com/wiki/iRules.HTTP__payload.ashx
Thanks.
Here's an example with jsession IDs that should get you started with basic persistence flow, and this example gives you an idea on how to work with payload data.
Related
When sending a request via Zuul to a client, Zuul seems to change the query String. More specifically, if the client should receive an url-encoded query String, Zuul decodes the query String once. Here is a concrete example:
If "http://localhost:8080/demo/demo?a=http%3A%2F%2Fsomething/" is sent to the client, the client receives as a query String "a=http://something/".
Looking into Zuul`s code, the function "buildZuulRequestQueryParams" uses "HTTPRequestUtils.getInstance().getQueryParams();" which decodes the query String.
Is this a desired feature or a bug?
Zuul actually offers a flag to disable this behavior.
8.9 Query String Encoding
When processing the incoming request, query params are decoded so that they can be available for possible modifications in Zuul filters. They are then re-encoded the backend request is rebuilt in the route filters. The result can be different than the original input if (for example) it was encoded with Javascript’s encodeURIComponent() method. While this causes no issues in most cases, some web servers can be picky with the encoding of complex query string.
To force the original encoding of the query string, it is possible to pass a special flag to ZuulProperties so that the query string is taken as is with the HttpServletRequest::getQueryString method, as shown in the following example:
application.yml.
zuul:
forceOriginalQueryStringEncoding: true
[Note] This special flag works only with SimpleHostRoutingFilter.
Also, you loose the ability to easily override query parameters with
RequestContext.getCurrentContext().setRequestQueryParams(someOverriddenParameters),
because the query string is now fetched directly on the original
HttpServletRequest.
8. Router and Filter: Zuul
I was facing the same issue yesterday. I think it's related to this pull request. A faster way to solve this issue (without wait for PR get merged) is rewrite the classes in your own project using the same package and class name to override the framework class.
I ran into the same issue recently. Submitted a PR to Netflix/Zuul. Basically adding the same ability that's currently available on spring cloud gateway to Netflix. Hoping it'll get addressed soon.
If accepted, you could pretty much add a config to keep the original uri encoding
zuul.keepOriginalQueryStringEncoding=true
What error format must be used by RESTful API when content negotiation fails (ActionController::UnknownFormat is raised):
when a controller responds to the only one format (e. g. JSON) and the user has requested another one (e. g. XML), should the error be generated as JSON object or XML one?
when a controller responds to several formats and the user has requested neither of them, which one should be used during error generation: one of the 'known' by the controller or the one, having been requested by the user?
I think you are under no obligation to respond to any invalid request with the same format as the request was made. Imagine getting a request with payload in unknown binary format - what are you supposed to do in such a case.
ActionController::UnknownFormat should trigger a 406 Not Acceptable response, probably will in Rails 5.
You should rescue the ActionController::UnknownFormat and respond with proper HTTP code as well as set an Accept header listing all formats that your API supports (if Rails doesn't do it by default, I'm not sure)
first of all I'd like to thank the team for this amazing project, it is indeed exiting to be able to start writing server-side software in Swift.
I'm successfully running a POC using PerfectServer on an Ubuntu VM and working on the API to interact with the mobile client.
There is one aspect I didn't quite understand yet, and that is accessing the request body data from my PerfectServer Handler.
Here is the workflow I have in mind:
The client submits a POST request to PerfectServer including some
JSON encoded body data
Once that hits the "valuesForResponse:" of
my server side Handler, I retrieve the WebRequest representation of
my request successfully
The request object does expose a many
properties of the HTTP request, including headers and the url-like
formatted query parameters.
Unfortunately, I cannot see a way to retrieve the underlying request body data. I would expect that to be some kind of public properties exposing the raw data that my handle can retrieve and decode in order to process the request.
The only example provided in the Examples workspace that comes with the project and sends a POST request that includes a body is in the project Authenticator. Here the HTTP body part takes the form os a UTF-8 encoded string where the values are query-params-like formatted.
name=Matteo&password=mypassword
This gets somehow exposed on the server handler by the WebRequest "param" property, that in the inner implementation of HTTPServer seems to expect an "&" separated string of key-values:
What I would expect is to have a way to provide body data in whatever form / encoding needed, in my case a JSON form:
{"name":"Matteo", "password":"psw"}
and be able to access that data from the WebRequest in my handler, decode it and use it to serve the request.
To summarise, I assume you could say that a WebRequest.bodyData public property is what I am after here :).
Is there something I am missing here?
Thanks in advance for any clarification!
I am very new to web api stuff:
I am getting an error
406: Not Acceptable
error message in asp.net web api rest service.
In my rest service I’m using media format for my customized XML output, to get customized output.
I’m registering my formatted media in Global.asax page.
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.Clear();
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.Add(new mynewformat());
all my methods are post methods with typed object as parameter and parameters are accepts from body.
Whenever I try to test the service… Getting 406: Not acceptable error message.
can anyone please help me ... what could be the reason for this....???
I did notice couple of interesting points here...
If I’m commenting below line then I’m getting 200 (OK) status code (which is fine.)... but format is not applying to output.
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.Clear();
If i'm removing parameters in my service method.. Then its working
fine..
I request everyone.. Please guide me what could be the reason/work around/solution/fix..for this issue.
Note:I don't want accept parameters from URI so i made it to accept from frombody only.
Thanks.
There is a lot more to implementing a custom format than just adding it to the configuration formatters. It starts with having to change the media-type header to a new custom type of your choosing (like "application/myNewFormat") for all requests, for the client. On the back end, you have to implement a new MediaTypeFormatter that can handle the serialization. This involves a bit more of code.
A good example of this resides here, it can easily be stripped to boiler-plate code:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/559378/Implementing-Custom-Media-Formatters-in-ASP-NET-We
I'm using BITS to make requests to a ASP.NET MVC controller method named Source that returns a FileResult. I know the type FilePathResult uses HttpResponse.TransmitFile, but I don't know if HttpResponse.TransmitFile actually writes the file to the response stream regardless of the request type.
My question is, does FileResult only include the header information on HEAD requests, or does it transmit the file regardless of the request type? Or, do I have to account for HEAD requests myself?
The result is forced to react on a request by YOUR ACTION CODE. If you do not do anything special on different request types (e.g. [HttpGet]-Attribute, HttpMethodConstraints in the Route, etc...) The file is just written to the response stream.