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

Re: i28 proposed replacement text

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 16:02:21 +0200
To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, Robert Siemer <Robert.Siemer-httpwg@backsla.sh>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>, Joe Orton <joe@manyfish.co.uk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1212674541.25475.25.camel@henriknordstrom.net>

On tor, 2008-06-05 at 09:55 -0400, Yves Lafon wrote:

> The proxy may add a Warning header to indicate this, it would be a better 
> match than closing the connection in the middle of a chunk.

Most times it's too late to add a header as the header portion has
already been sent to the requesting client, and you can't send a trailer
header without  both the following

  - Indication of positive response without error
  - The headers you place in the trailer needs to be advertised in the
initial header portion.

> One question is... if a Transfer encoding of gzip is used + connection 
> closure form the server to the proxy, and the client sent a TE: gzip to 
> the proxy, should the proxy gunzip the content, then gzip it back (as 
> TE/TEncoding is hop-by-hop) ? (and it that case an error may be noticed) ?

Doesn't really matter for the initial request, but it should at least
verify the Transfer-Encoding if storing the object in cache and discard
the object if the Transfer-Encoding isn't decodeable.


Regards
Henrik
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2008 14:03:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:48 GMT