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

Re: HTTP2 Expression of Interest : Squid

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 23:33:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbebPbezCoPweze8cxDx6293auazZLOwhdFPFyrnTNEPbg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, tom <zs68j2ee@gmail.com>
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com> wrote:

> [snip]
>> OK but some data may end up in the client's cache without having been
>> requested by him. I don't think it has a high technical impact, but it
>> may rather be a legal one in some cases. In fact it's a delicate question.
>>
>
> Let's not pretend that browsers behave differently than they do.  With
> HTTP today,  browsers download subresources - whether you use IE or Chrome
> or Opera or Safari.  All server push does is allow the server to optionally
> send the secondary resources without waiting for a second request from the
> client.  Servers that think this is illegal don't have to do it.  Clients
> that don't want it (these don't exist!) can cancel them.  Sending resources
> the browser won't use are no-ops and won't impact anything (except make
> your web page load slower, so don't do it).
>
>
One possibility to throw in here would be a simple requirement that the
server has to ask the client before it pushes... a reverse 100-Continue if
you will... require the server to tell the client what content it is trying
to push and give the client the opportunity to say No.... intervening
proxies, such as a corporate firewall, would be capable of answering on the
users behalf.

- James
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 06:34:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 16 July 2012 06:34:35 GMT