RE: HTTP/1.1 & Proxies

I would actually throw in a mention of the DAV effort in the IETF which
is defining a standardized mechanism for accessing properties on a
server. This would provide a very flexible mechanism. Either way, this
doesn't really help us with our current situation, which is - How do we
deploy HTTP 1.1 in a world of broken proxies and servers? Are we heading
toward a situation where we will have to modify 1.1 in order to
establish a handshake to be sure that we are talking to a 1.1
server/proxy? How do we get this handshake to work across multiple
proxies? Is there a way to avoid soiling the HTTP standard in this way?
How bad is the problem? 
		Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Josh [SMTP:josh@netscape.com]
> Sent:	Tuesday, July 01, 1997 12:58 AM
> To:	Yaron Goland
> Cc:	http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com; 'w3c-http@w3.org'; Thomas Reardon;
> Joe Peterson; Hadi Partovi; Arthur Bierer; Richard Firth
> Subject:	Re: HTTP/1.1 & Proxies
> 
> I think this is yet another critical need for a versatile OPTIONS
> method.
> 
> I after Roy's ( I think it was him ) comments, Ive begun drawing
> up a rough idea for a flexible OPTIONS method message.
> 
> I think that as more HTTP1.1 areas come to be implemented, more
> cases like this will show up.
> 
> The need seems to be to query a proxy ( or a server ) about
> its support, or lack of it, for a specific feature, mode,
> or otherwise..
> 
> Ill try and post my rough idea to the list by the end of the week.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
> Josh Cohen				        Netscape Communications
> Corp.
> Netscape Fire Department	     	      "Mighty Morphin' Proxy
> Ranger"
> Server Engineering			                  
> josh@netscape.com
> http://home.netscape.com/people/josh/
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------

Received on Tuesday, 1 July 1997 13:34:55 UTC