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 10:24:41 +1000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <DC006EA6-EB06-4551-AB75-24A5AD00E3F4@mnot.net>
To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>

+1

It may be worth putting a few words around Via so that people  
understand its function. The folks on this list won't be around  
forever to educate them (and although the list archives will be there,  
most won't bother with them).

Cheers,



On 06/04/2008, at 10:18 AM, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

>
> sön 2008-04-06 klockan 10:06 +1000 skrev Mark Nottingham:
>> /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...
>
> Yes, and the specs says...
>
>        The Via general-header field MUST be used by gateways and
>        proxies to indicate the intermediate protocols and recipients
>        between the user agent and the server on requests
>
> The only way forward on that is educating implementers about the
> importance of Via, and make them expose the following feature  
> instead or
> allowing Via to be removed:
>
>        However, if the real host is considered to be sensitive
>        information, it MAY be replaced by a pseudonym.
>
> which is the correct resolution to the issue people try to solve by
> removing the Via header..
>
> Regards
> Henrik
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 6 April 2008 00:25:20 GMT

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