Shipping an official HTTP client in Netty (NETTY-333)

[Kevin Burton]

I thought about this but there are a number of issues regarding HTTP that
need to be addressed:

- infinite DNS caching
- TCP connect timeout/ read timeout
- User-Agent headers
- redirect handling
- gzip encoding
- I could go on...

... doing this 2 different ways for 2 different implementations is no fun
and will lead to bugs.

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:18 AM, "이희승 (Trustin Lee)" <trustin at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
> Wouldn't other existing libraries like async-http-client from Jean-francois
> Arcand work for you?
>
>     https://github.com/sonatype/async-http-client
>
> Cheers
>
>
> Kevin Burton wrote:
> > I was looking at NETTY-333 (and have been thinking about this a bit
> > lately)
> >
> >
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/NETTY-333?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel#issue-tabs
> >
> > ... and I think Netty should ship an official HTTP client. Not just an
> > example.
> >
> > This would be a replacement for java.net.URL or say Jakarta HttpClient.
> >
> > This would have the following advantages:
> >
> > 1. More people would be able to use Netty.  Right now Netty is mostly
> > an API for building clients and servers but this would mean that
> > people can use Netty out of the box for their usages.
> >
> > 2. The client would use best practices and avoid common bugs.  I built
> > a client in Peregrine that uses Netty and I've already been bitten by
> > a few issues I didn't anticipate.
> >
> > 3. Developers would benefit from bugs fixed in the client moving
> > forward as they are fixed.
> >
> > I also think we may need to build a different type of client that
> > isn't necessarily fully async.
> >
> > What I did with peregrine (as it fits directly into the model I need)
> > is that we write to a buffer from the main thread.  The buffer then
> > writes to Netty which then does Async IO (this is an HTTP PUT
> > client).  The great thing about this model is that if the receiver
> > can't handle the data being sent to it, the client just blocks.
> >
> > In our usage we often write from 1 client to N servers.  Anywhere from
> > 10-1000 ... so the async buys us the ability to not need 1k threads
> > doing the IO.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > _______________________________________________
> > netty-users mailing list
> > netty-users at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> netty-users mailing list
> netty-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>



-- 

Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com

Location: *San Francisco, CA*
Skype: *burtonator*

Skype-in: *(415) 871-0687*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/netty-users/attachments/20111027/38f41d69/attachment-0001.html