- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:58:45 +0100 (MET)
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Roy T. Fielding: >Koen asked: >> Upgraded-From: HTTP/1.0, HTTP/1.1 >> >> With this header, my detectability requirements are met. Roy, is this >> header acceptable to you? > >Jeff and I talked about this concept during the LA IETF. I think that >it belongs in the Forwarded header. It was also pointed out (by JimG) >that the Forwarded header as currently defined has too many unnecessary >bytes, so we thought about coming up with a more compact encoding. > >How about this as a complete replacement for the current Forwarded? >=================================================================== > >10.xx Via [...] This looks like a great improvement to me. The Via header meets my detectability requirements. Roy, I will propose some minor edits to your header text in private e-mail, these edits will not change the header semantics. The introduction of Via changes the status of the issue 'Section 3.1: interoperability between HTTP/1.0 and HTTP/1.1' on the issues list. Old text: KH: Section 3.1: interoperability between HTTP/1.0 and HTTP/1.1. Do version handling rules for servers and proxies need to be changed? Review the whole spec for interoperability problems. New text: KH: Section 3.1: interoperability between HTTP/1.0 and HTTP/1.1. Do version handling rules for servers and proxies need to be changed? Status: No, the Via header will make version upgrades and downgrades by proxies detectable to parties that need to know. Review the whole spec for interoperability problems. Status: to be done by the whole http-wg in April. [Note to Jim Gettys: In the last version of the issues list I have, the above old text appears twice. Please delete the first instance.] Koen.
Received on Sunday, 24 March 1996 03:03:52 UTC