Hello I tried to implement webhook logs listener based on this answer
https://stackoverflow.com/a/31478765/13418836
but response on log is only smthing like this
POST / HTTP/1.1
content-type: application/json
Host: localhost:9876
Connection: close
Content-Length: 63
I need to get live tail logs of certain appium server instance, could you provide me with working solution, or what am I doing wrong? Thanks.
I configured java.net.http.HttpClient as shown below:
HttpClient client = HttpClient.newBuilder().version(HttpClient.Version.HTTP_1_1).build();
Also, I have a simple Spring Boot (Tomcat) HTTP server, which is running on the 8080 port. For each request, I check incoming headers in a controller and the number of TCP connections using the next command: lsof -i -P | grep "TCP" | grep "8080".
When I make a GET request from client then exactly one TCP connection is created for each request. Incoming headers don't have any information about keep-alive
When I try to set keep-alive header directly I got the exception.
HttpRequest req = HttpRequest.newBuilder()
.setHeader("Connection", "Keep-Alive")
.uri(uri)
.build();
When I make a GET request from a browser (safari) then the browser adds keep-alive headers to each request and only one TCP connection is created for multiply requests (as expected).
When I set version HTTP/2 and make the request from the client then only one TCP connection creates for all requests (as expected):
HttpClient client = HttpClient.newBuilder().version(HttpClient.Version.HTTP_2).build();
As described here - both HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2 have keep-alive property which is enabled by default, but as you can see from the examples above it doesn't work for HTTP/1.1 in my case.
Does anyone know how to configure HttpClient properly? Or maybe, I'm doing something wrong?
How do I handle properly a client Connection: close request field? As of now if I get this particular field I close the socket and wait for a following request from the client than reply again and start serving the data.
I don't know why my client/server communication is not working as the Apache Server I tested with.
Thanks for any clarifications...
Client/Server comunication:
CLIENT:
HEAD /stream.mpeg HTTP/1.0
Host: 127.0.0.1
User-Agent: SuperPlayer
Connection: Close
SERVER:
HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 20:05:13 GMT
Server: HTTP Server
Last-Modified: Mon, 06 Aug 2009 01:02:23 GMT
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Connection: Close
Content-Type: audio/mpeg
CLIENT:
HEAD /stream.mpeg HTTP/1.0
Host: 127.0.0.1
User-Agent: SuperPlayer
Connection: Close
SERVER:
HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 20:05:13 GMT
Server: HTTP Server
Last-Modified: Mon, 06 Aug 2009 01:02:23 GMT
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Connection: Close
Content-Type: audio/mpeg
231489172304981723409817234981234acvass123412323
21312hjdfaoi8w34yorhadl4hi8rali45mhalo3i,wmotw
345fqw354aoicu43yocq2i3hr
Client/ApacheServer Comunication:
CLIENT:
GET /test.mp3 HTTP/1.0
Host: 192.168.1.120
User-Agent: SuperPlayer
Connection: Close
SERVER:
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 19:15:11 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.16 (Win32)
Last-Modified: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 21:06:34 GMT
ETag: "14000000047049-4f75c8-4856680636a80"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 5207496
Connection: close
Content-Type: audio/mpeg
...d.....<).0.. ..........<.#.. ( .h.$.J...1...i....A. ......c....a.9..!g.N...A. ........ ....>......|.......8....a......|..|N.............'>........?...C.....#..TJt.n .e...r.iL..#..IH...pR|.
Yes closing the socket is the right action to take. If the client is using this header properly, they are closing the socket on their end once they receive your response.
What I'm noticing here is that your server is not returning a Content-Length header. Even though the client is issuing a HEAD request, based on the W3C proposal (sec. 9.4):
The metainformation contained in the HTTP
headers in response to a HEAD request
SHOULD be identical to the information
sent in response to a GET request.
This method can be used for obtaining
metainformation about the entity
implied by the request without
transferring the entity-body itself.
This method is often used for testing
hypertext links for validity,
accessibility, and recent
modification.
The response to a HEAD request MAY be
cacheable in the sense that the
information contained in the response
MAY be used to update a previously
cached entity from that resource. If
the new field values indicate that the
cached entity differs from the current
entity (as would be indicated by a
change in Content-Length, Content-MD5,
ETag or Last-Modified), then the cache
MUST treat the cache entry as stale.
The key here is to make sure you're telling the client the size of the response without actually sending the data.
The Connection: close header just means that the client is expecting you to close the connection after sending the response. That also absolves you of having to send a Content-Length: header.
May I ask why are you using http 1.0 in the request?
There were no persistent connections in http 1.0, so the server is supposed to terminate the TCP connection after the response, whether you send Connection: close or not.
If you are using HTTP 1.0, there is no persistent connections as alexrs pointed, instead, Connection: keep-alive is being used with HTTP 1.0. On HTTP 1.1, you do not need that because HTTP connections are persistent by default on HTTP 1.1.
8.1.2 Overall Operation
A significant difference between HTTP/1.1 and earlier versions of HTTP
is that persistent connections are the default behavior of any HTTP
connection. That is, unless otherwise indicated, the client SHOULD
assume that the server will maintain a persistent connection, even
after error responses from the server.
Persistent connections provide a mechanism by which a client and a
server can signal the close of a TCP connection. This signaling takes
place using the Connection header field (section 14.10). Once a close
has been signaled, the client MUST NOT send any more requests on that
connection.
You can take a look at to the HTTP 1.1 RFC;
RFC for HTTP 1.1
Worldpay (The payment processor from RBS) sends a HTTP Post to my website once a payment is accepted. Problem is - the Post isnt getting through and my server responds with one of the following 3 HTTP error's:
HTTP 408 (Timeout)
HTTP 405 (Not allowed)
Invalid status line >NULL<
Now when i Post something to the url from my test php script this works fine which leads me to believe the issue could be with the fact that the Post from them is created by Java:
POST /worldpay_success.html HTTP/1.0
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded; charset=UTF-8
Host: www.mysite.com
Content-Length: 116
User-Agent: WJHRO/1.0 (WorldPay Java HTTP Request Object)
authAmountString=%26%23163%3B1.99&_SP.charEnc=UTF-8&desc=Test.....etc
Does anyone have any experience with this? After speaking to Worldpay they say my server is responding with a 408 Timeout after 0.1 seconds so it doesnt seem to be properly timeing out... Any help apreciated
Paul
Check 405 Method Not Allowed and Request Timeout. It shouldn't matter if the POST request is created from Java.
I noticed my home router has some configuration field "TR-069 CLIENT CONFIGURATION" and some obscure address that I noticed gets resolved quite often each day. (Yes obviously to config the router remotely.. or something) But I want to see what is being sent. So wrote a very simple "web server" in Java to read in HTTP requests (the field in the router was with a normal http:// address) and print them out. (i set that field to point to my computer where the little server is running)
And im getting these:
Host: 192.168.1.2
User-Agent: Allegro-Software-WebClient/4.07
Accept: */*
Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8
Content-Length: 2767
SOAPAction:
Was kind of hoping SOAPAction: wouldnt be empty but what does this mean, is it some deprecated feature of the router that just happens to keep going? (its a d-link ADSL Router)
There would be multiple soap envelopes in HTTP Request.
TR-069 spec says
When there is more than one envelope
in a single HTTP Request, the
SOAPAction header in the HTTP Request
MUST have no value (with no quotes),
indicating that this header provides
no information as to the intent of the
message. That is, it should appear as
follows:
SOAPAction: