- From: Balint Nagy Endre <bne@bne.ind.eunet.hu>
- Date: Wed, 4 Oct 1995 08:06:32 +0100 (MET)
- To: Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>
- Cc: http WG <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Paul Leach writes [in reply to Ari Luotonen]: > I think the major difference between these two kinds of proxies is that > one is transparent, and the other isn't. For example, what you call a > "server proxy" looks like a server to the client, and like a client to > the server. Hence I find the proposed names confusing. I propose the simple transparent proxy instead. (and non-transparent). This needs no change in draft, but only in WGs terminology. > The ability to transparently interpose agents is an important design > criterion for a protocol... in the current versions of HTTP, it can not > be done in general. > > One small step in this direction would be to allow full URLs in > requests to origin servers in HTTP 1.1. (In HTTP 1.0 and the current > HTTP 1.1 draft, they are only allowed in requests to proxies.) (The > use of Host: may already meet this requirement... if so, maybe this > suggested change might end up in deprecated usage.) Good idea, but requires a lot of discussion for 1.0-1.1 interoperatibility. (That discussion would be useful without this proposal.) Andrew. (Endre Balint Nagy) <bne@bne.ind.eunet.hu>
Received on Wednesday, 4 October 1995 00:19:08 UTC