Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am using nginx as reverse proxy and I have 2 rules like:

location ~ ^/indirect {
  rewrite ^/indirect(.*) /foobar$1;
}

location ~ ^/foobar {
  set $url http://example.com/something/index.php?var1=hello&access=$scheme://$host$uri;
  proxy_pass $url;
}

So, as you can see I'm passing the $uri variable as a parameter to the proxied page (the $uri variable is an nginx one, see the http core module documentation).

Problem is, if I visit http://example.com/foobar/hello%20world, the $uri variable contains /foobar/hello world (as you see, the %20 has been substituted with its url-decoded value, a space). And then, nginx returns http status code 400 (bad request) before executing the proxy_pass line (the backend there is not contacted).

There is also available the variable $request_uri, which holds the original request URI as issued by the client, so in this case it would hold the correct value, with the %20 sequence. But I cannot use this because if a client goes through the /indirect path, $request_uri would contain /indirect/... while I want that the access param passed to the backend be always /foobar/....

There are multiple indirect-like rules (this is for a DAV/calDAV/cardDAV server, and there are multiple clients out there that connect to multiple paths, so I need these indirect-like rules), so it is not feasible to do the proxy_pass there, and there are clients that go directly to the /foobar path.

So is there any way to get $uri without url-decoding it?

possible things that aren't acceptable:

  • sending the request double-encoded, as the request may come from a client I have no control of
  • specifying the final url multiple times in eacy indirect rule and also in the "direct" one, as it causes maintenance problems.
share|improve this question
1  
This whole setup is its own maintenance problem. So I'm not sure why you would reject a solution because it might be a "maintenance problem". –  Michael Hampton Nov 5 '12 at 16:52
    
@MichaelHampton yes, you are right, but if it's possible I don't want to make it even less maintainable –  Carlos Campderrós Nov 6 '12 at 8:15
    
Finally I ended doing external 301 redirects from all the indirect uri's to the direct one, and only having the proxy_pass there. Should I answer my own question with this workaround? –  Carlos Campderrós Nov 12 '12 at 9:39

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.