- From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 01:33:42 +0200
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Cc: Brian McBarron <bpm@google.com>, google-gears-eng@googlegroups.com, Charles Fry <fry@google.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
lör 2008-04-05 klockan 12:56 +1300 skrev Adrien de Croy: > > just off the top of my head, if you > > (a) can't rely on intermediaries to pass on headers they don't > understand (e.g. which you could use to flag a requirement) - even > though this is a requirement This is effectively saying "you can't trust intermediaries". I would be very surprised if you find a proxy which aims for semantic transparency and which do not forward unknown headers. > (b) can't rely on Expects to be processed incorrectly by intermediaries I would expect any HTTP/1.1 intermediary to process Expect. > (c) can't rely on intermediaries to pass on methods they don't > understand (even though the capability to be able to do this is required > in the spec) I am not aware of a such requirement in the specs, but common sense says that a semantically transparent proxy should forward extension-methods. Regards Henrik
Received on Saturday, 5 April 2008 23:35:55 UTC