- From: Graham Klyne <GK@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jul 1997 11:10:07 +0100
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com, w3c-http@w3.org
At 01:10 PM 7/2/97 -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >>>In general, there is no way to modify HTTP such that an invisible >>>broken proxy can be detected. >> >>Is this really true? It seems a very sweeping statement. > >It is true provided that the proxy remains invisible. > [...] >Note also that I distinguish between a proxy and a tunnel in the spec. > >The problem with Gauntlet is that it is either a broken proxy >or a really lousy tunnel, [...] I have spent some time thinking about what you said, and find myself forced to concede your point. I now think the most that could be achieved would be to detect the presence of an 'invisible' proxy OR a tunnel in the communication path. And that by reference to the underlying transport protocol, or some other external reference, so not strictly within the HTTP protocol. Thank you for helping me to improve my understanding of HTTP. GK. --- ------------ Graham Klyne GK@ACM.ORG
Received on Thursday, 3 July 1997 03:13:39 UTC