Rob Hartill: >Koen Holtman wrote: > [Rob Hartill:] >>> such actions should not be tolerated. >> >>Your conclusion, not mine. I interpret their action as a mistake, not >>as an act of war. You forget that about half the people on this list >>(mis?)interpret the version number requirements of HTTP/1.x in the >>same way as AOL does. > >but did any of them set out to deliberately sabotage the work of others >by silently blocking access ?. Geez. Try to look at it from their side. AOL thought it was detecting a new type of protocol error, and decided to let their proxies report it. At least that is what I read from their response to you which is quoted on http://www.apache.org/info/aol-http.html . I would hardly call what they did deliberate sabotage. Aggressive diagnostics maybe. And I wouldn't call their error message silent. Also, they did respond to your mail about it, didn't they? [...] >>I don't think you should go to war with AOL. > >The "war" is over before it started. AOL have now surrendered. An AOL >network director has told me that AOL will undo their HTTP/1.1 >blockade. Well, count me pleasantly surprised at their speed. >>I recommend that you treat AOL's proxies as inferior 1.0 implementations > >what new ? :-) I did not say `start to treat as inferior', I said `treat as inferior'. >rob Koen.Received on Monday, 23 December 1996 14:40:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:00 UTC