Re: [jetty-users] Jetty client

[Simone Bordet <sbordet@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Mikhail Mazursky <ash2kk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2013/9/6 Simone Bordet <sbordet@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Mikhail Mazursky <ash2kk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hello.
>> >
>> > Few questions about Jetty Client:
>> >
>> > 1. Do it support SNI [1]? For example Apache Http Client do not [2] and
>> > we
>> > want to switch maybe to Jetty Client or some other.
>>
>> Not sure about your question here.
>> The client side of SNI is taken care of in modern JDKs, which send the
>> SNI TLS extension by default to servers.
>> The current problem in Java is that it is not readable by servers.
>>
> AFAIK only SSL connections created using URL class use SNI. SSL sockets that
> are created manually have to be explicitly set to use SNI by using setHost
> method (as demonstrated by the link in the Ryan's email). But I may be wrong
> here.

Being asynchronous, HttpClient does not use SSLSocket.
It uses SSLEngine, which does set the SNI (under certain conditions,
but they are usually met).

>> > 2. Are there any plans to support JSR-339 [3]? I think it can be usefull
>> > to
>> > abstract implementation and be able to switch them. I found two
>> > implementations of this JSR - Jersey [4] (reference implementation) and
>> > Apache CXF [5]. I'm not sure what the CXF project is but looks like it
>> > supports this JSR.
>>
>> JSR 339 is about a REST API on the server side.
>> I am not sure what you mean here about the client side.
>>
> JSR 339 also defines client api, take a look at chapter 5 of the spec.

Ah, I missed that.
We don't plan to support JSR 339, certainly not on HttpClient itself
(API conflict).
It would be fairly easy to implement JSR 339 on top of HttpClient though.

-- 
Simone Bordet
----
http://cometd.org
http://webtide.com
http://intalio.com
Developer advice, training, services and support
from the Jetty & CometD experts.
Intalio, the modern way to build business applications.