Lib.rs

Rust versions

I urge you to track Rust master as rust-http does, but if you really are set on using Rust 0.9, you can use the [rust-0.9-compatible branch](https://github.com/chris-morgan/rust-http/commits/rust-0.9-compatible). It is not maintained, however; it's just the last commit that will work on Rust 0.9.

Goals

The goal of the present phase of this project is, quite simply, to create a generic HTTP server and client library for Rust.

When I say “generic”, generic is what I mean: it is quite feasible to write non-origin servers (e.g. a proxy or a gateway) with rust-http; there will merely be a slightly higher level abstraction available for origin servers to use.

At present this is all one crate, but it may be separated into multiple crates (e.g. common HTTP, client, server); I am not sure about this yet.

This server is not (in the normal sense) opinionated; it provides the tools, handles communication, the HTTP/1.1 protocol and the basic headers and then leaves the rest to you. Things like URL routing do not belong in here; that is the domain of a framework.

There is, however, one thing on which it has strong opinions: using the type system. rust-http forces you to make type-safe code. This has benefits in safety and correctness, and also typically in speed.

Getting started

This is developed on Ubuntu and is aimed at the moving target of Rust's master branch.

Build with Cargo:

cargo build

Compile the examples:

cargo test

Run one of the servers:

target/test/apache_fake

To run the client example, start one of the servers and run:

target/test/client http://127.0.0.1:8001/

At present, all of the example servers serve to http://127.0.0.1:8001/.

Don't expect everything to work well. The server claims HTTP/1.1, but is not in any way compliant yet.

SSL support

rust-http is compiled with SSL support.

Roadmap

Here are some of the things to be done. They are only very vaguely ordered and treat client and server quite indiscriminately.

• Implement HTTP/1.1.

  • Handle transfer codings, especially chunked (rather essential to a server supporting keep-alive).
  • Read request body (start with reading it entirely, for simplicity: at present, one can't split up the TcpStream into a Reader and a Writer that can both be accessed at once; just recognise this is an efficiency and security flaw, to be fixed later in "read request body incrementally"). This is necessary to do things like POST.
  • Treat headers as data, not strings.
  • Make it easy to work with things like cookies, etags and caches.

• Tests, lots of them. There's very little just now.

• Benchmarks, lots of them. This will be helpful at the level of my code and also at the runtime level.

• Improve the convenience and correctness of the HTTP client.

• DoS prevention: largely to do with things like connection timeouts. Make a test suite using pathod.

• Efficiency/DoS prevention: read request body incrementally.

• TLS/SSL comes a long way down the path; before I would be willing to trust it as secure server I'd want an independent audit; for now, it's safer and easier to use it through a reverse proxy like Nginx and let it take care of SSL.

  Servo's existence will be helping this project quite a bit; it will, somewhere along the way, need a TLS/SSL implementation, and we'll be able to use that, mostly.

When most of these things are done, then I'll start developing my web framework. And it'll end up blindingly fast, astonishingly safe and remarkably convenient. But don't plan on using it in 2013.

Design (server)

(In this section, the first person pronoun refers to Chris Morgan.)

I have hitherto been by-and-large a Python developer. I started designing this by examining Python's WSGI (PEP 3333), which is considered good enough that Ruby's Rack is directly based on it. However, I quickly came to the conclusion that its design is optimised for a quite different use case; my goal in Rust is to provide the entire server, rather than to interface with another server. Certain other design decisions are incompatible with my Grand Vision. Take, for example, this case:

Why use CGI variables instead of good old HTTP headers? And why mix them in with WSGI-defined variables?

Many existing web frameworks are built heavily upon the CGI spec, and existing web servers know how to generate CGI variables. In contrast, alternative ways of representing inbound HTTP information are fragmented and lack market share. Thus, using the CGI "standard" seems like a good way to leverage existing implementations. As for mixing them with WSGI variables, separating them would just require two dictionary arguments to be passed around, while providing no real benefits.

In Rust, there is no base of code already following such a convention and so we are not tethered by this requirement. My own feeling on such matters is that for the static typing world having such things is not beneficial, anyway. Most web systems would have something along these lines, working with what is effectively a Map<String, String>:

response.headers["Date"] = format_http_time(now_utc())

The header Date is known, and is a date and time. Why not rather have it thus?

response.headers.date = now_utc()

To be certain, there may be need for unknown headers; yet even there one probably does not wish a String value, but a more suitable type implementing a trait to convert to and from an appropriate string.

Note that with these examples the precise form is not determined.

The end result of these matters is that I determined not to model WSGI at all. In the end, Go's net/http package has been my primary source of inspiration, but I am creating something which is quite definitely distinct: net/http is for inspiration only, then I do my own thing. You see, Go lacks all sorts of nice things Rust has, such as its enums and iteration on aught beyond built-in types.

License

This library is distributed under similar terms to Rust: dual licensed under the MIT license and the Apache license (version 2.0).

See LICENSE-APACHE, LICENSE-MIT, and COPYRIGHT for details.