- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 07:07:29 +0000
- To: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
- cc: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <BN6PR03MB2708CBEF5A4474D13D94D23287230@BN6PR03MB2708.namprd03.prod. outlook.com>, Mike Bishop writes: > I'm sympathetic to the lack of configured proxies' abilities to, > with user/client awareness, monitor the contents of transactions > which are otherwise encrypted and return meaningful errors. I'm > less sympathetic to middleboxes that act without client awareness > or configuration. If so, wouldn't it make sense to proactively make it easier to roll out the former than the latter, rather than make it equally hard ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Saturday, 11 March 2017 07:08:02 UTC