W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 13:51:44 +1200
Message-ID: <4FA5D930.4030804@treenet.co.nz>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 5/05/2012 8:15 a.m., Peter Lepeska wrote:
> I can think of an enterprise use case but it's pretty contrived. WAN 
> optimizing appliances use the TCP option field to auto-negotiate 
> optimized connections when appliances are present in the data path. 
> See 
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/solutions/Enterprise/Data_Center/WAASDC11.html. 
>
>
> Should there be an HTTP proxy in between those optimizing appliances, 
> the TCP option field would be lost along with the original client 
> source IP address and port. However, if this information was included 
> in the HTTP GET Headers then the functionality could in theory be 
> preserved.
>
> I know it's a stretch.
>

Not so much of a stretch. I have a client this week asking about how to 
relay TOS information from parent proxy through child proxy and use it 
on the outbound client link.

At present we have to rely on the kernel sockets API to access TOS 
values, which is lacking on a lot of systems. Long term I think that is 
the better way to go anyway but in general the principle is one to consider.

AYJ
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2012 01:52:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 May 2012 01:52:16 GMT