W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: Deploying new expectation-extensions

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 10:06:32 +1000
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BE2FE056-A543-4974-89F9-78261C9FD0DB@mnot.net>
To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>

/me shakes head at self... good point.

The problem that this raises is that many people configure their  
proxies to not send Via headers. This breaks the algorithm that Roy  
posts later on...



On 06/04/2008, at 8:56 AM, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

>
> fre 2008-04-04 klockan 10:06 +1100 skrev Mark Nottingham:
>> I've tested a fairly wide variety of proxies with co-advisor; the
>> only
>> one that passed the related set of tests was very recent builds of
>> Squid (2.7DEVEL0). Everything else -- including Squid 2.6STABLE4 --
>> failed (it would take some digging to figure out exactly where this
>> happened, unless Henrik knows; regardless, I think it's safe to say
>> that a very large proportion of Squid's installed base fails as  
>> well).
>
> Squid-2.6 is an HTTP/1.0 proxy. It does not have to or even need to  
> look
> into Expect. In HTTP/1.0 Expect is just an extension header like any
> other extension header.
>
> Regards
> Henrik
>
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 6 April 2008 00:07:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:46 GMT