Hide port in QRCode to use qrcp behind a reverse proxy

[scotow]

I'm opening this issue because:

• I have found a bug
• I want to request a feature
• I have a question
• Other

Feature proposal:

Add an option allowing users to hide the port (and the colon) displayed in the QRCode and URL, allowing people to put qrcp behind a reverse proxy.

Problem example:

1. User creates a reverse proxy entry for qrcp.example.com and forward it to localhost:6666;
2. User configs qrcp to use port 6666 and fqdn qrcp.example.com;
3. The generated QRCode redirects to http://qrcp.example.com:6666 instead of qrcp.example.com (:80).

Proposal:

• Add an option to hide the port and colon in the displayed QRCode, or
• Allow users to specify a full base URL. This option must conflict with --fqdn and --port option, and could even let users specify the protocol (example: -f https://qrcp.example.com.

Advantages:

• Cleaner URL;
• Allows HTTPS if the reverse proxy handle certificate generation (like Caddy);
• Allows people behind high-restricted proxy (not allowing users to access websites that are not on port 80 or 443), to use qrcp;
• Using a custom DNS + reverse proxy like presented, allows the use of qrcp behind NATed network (qrcd server is in a NATed network, reverse proxy is on the edge of the network or on a remote server forwarding traffic through SSH tunnel, and user is on a different network like 4G).

[claudiodangelis]

Hi, thanks for suggesting, I like this a lot. Let me think about a couple possible implementation and will let you know.
It may take some days, I'm a bit busy lately.

Cheers,
Claudio

[scotow]

Which proposal better fits the project? Adding an option to hide the port? Adding an option to specify a complete base URL? Or maybe something else?

[claudiodangelis]

I like the second approach the most, honestly. However, we will have to figure out how not to confuse the end user about what is used and what is just displayed.