Mark Nottingham wrote: > > On 17/07/2009, at 5:05 PM, Adrien de Croy wrote: >> >> Transparent proxies are still required to insert Via? > > If you mean intercepting, yes (although they're not really kosher, > it's still necessary for them to do this if the various protocol > features that depend upon it are going to function). > I meant the definition in RFC2616 "A "transparent proxy" is a proxy that does not modify the request or response beyond what is required for proxy authentication and identification" But intercepting proxies are another kettle of fish again. I think the para at the start defining proxy states that unless there's wording specifically relating to requirements for transparent or non-transparent proxies, then the wording applies to both. Which then answers my question, since there's no mention of transparent or non-transparent in the clause for Via, one should assume it applies to both, which means a transparent proxy must also insert Via, which then leaves one wondering about the definition of it (unless we consider that Via is a function of identification?) Cheers Adrien -- Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.comReceived on Friday, 17 July 2009 07:12:37 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:39 GMT