Comment on FastCGI: 30 years old and still the better protocol for reverse proxiesparentComments−nzeid4moI've always chuckled at this. Just don't used bad HTTP server libraries. I wouldn't put something like that on my intranet either.But even if you disagree with me the point is that I can count on only one hand the number of times I went "oh man, I need a FastCGI middle end".−winstonwinston4moI agree with your point but this is the reality:F.E. Python stdlib http.server comes with a warning: Warning http.server is not recommended for production. It only implements basic security checks.The `standard` way is then to use WSGI or ASGI, not FastCGI, but it is similar interface implementation.
Comments
I've always chuckled at this. Just don't used bad HTTP server libraries. I wouldn't put something like that on my intranet either.
But even if you disagree with me the point is that I can count on only one hand the number of times I went "oh man, I need a FastCGI middle end".
I agree with your point but this is the reality:
F.E. Python stdlib http.server comes with a warning: Warning http.server is not recommended for production. It only implements basic security checks.
The `standard` way is then to use WSGI or ASGI, not FastCGI, but it is similar interface implementation.