Skip to content

Replace confusing URI origin with more specific guidance #2463

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 8, 2025

Conversation

lmolkova
Copy link
Contributor

@lmolkova lmolkova commented Jul 1, 2025

Related to #2443

Copy link

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR removes vague references to the RFC 9110 “URI origin” for server.address and server.port and replaces them with precise guidance on when to use the request-target host/port versus the Host/:authority header or IP address.

  • Remove all “URI origin” brief descriptions for server.address and server.port in YAML models.
  • Add detailed note sections describing HTTP/1.1 absolute-form request-target and header-based fallbacks.
  • Update documentation tables and footnotes in http-spans.md and http-metrics.md to match the new guidance.

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 7 comments.

File Description
model/http/metrics.yaml Replaced “URI origin” briefs with detailed notes for server.address and server.port.
model/http/common.yaml Updated common attributes: removed brief, added notes for matching host/port semantics.
docs/http/http-spans.md Updated table entries and footnotes [2]/[3] to remove “URI origin” and add specific host/port guidance.
docs/http/http-metrics.md Replaced span and metric tables and footnotes with new wording for server.address and server.port.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

model/http/metrics.yaml:197

  • Typo: 'absolte-form' should be 'absolute-form'.
          is passed in its [absolte-form](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9112.html#section-3.2.2),

@lmolkova lmolkova requested a review from a team as a code owner July 1, 2025 22:58
@github-actions github-actions bot added enhancement New feature or request area:http labels Jul 1, 2025
@lmolkova lmolkova moved this from Untriaged to Needs More Approval in Semantic Conventions Triage Jul 4, 2025
@lmolkova
Copy link
Contributor Author

lmolkova commented Jul 8, 2025

@antonfirsov could you please take another look?

Copy link

@antonfirsov antonfirsov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks a lot for addressing this!

@lmolkova lmolkova added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 8, 2025
Merged via the queue into open-telemetry:main with commit 728e5d1 Jul 8, 2025
15 checks passed
@lmolkova lmolkova deleted the http-uri-origin-replace branch July 8, 2025 18:28
spurplewang pushed a commit to spurplewang/semantic-conventions that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2025
antonfirsov added a commit to dotnet/runtime that referenced this pull request Jul 18, 2025
#117540)

With the merge of open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#2463, we are good to prioritize the contents of the `Host` header in cases no proxy is being used. The PR implements the change for both request and connection traces+metrics.

There is a non-negligible risk: actually, we do not and (with the current code structure) can not emit `network.peer.address` for request telemetry, meaning that with `http(s)://x.x.x.x/..` target Uri-s, IP information will be no longer present when a there is a Host header. I believe that most users would still prefer to see the contents of the Host header if there is a mismatch. Others can opt into connection metrics/traces where `network.peer.address` is available.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:http enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants