- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:20:31 +0100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi, I was recently pointed to RFC 3143, "Known HTTP Proxy/Caching Problems" (<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3143>). This one is interesting in that it claims to document several problems in the HTTP/1.1 *specification*. If these claims are correct, we should add the individual points to our issues tracker. If they are not, we should file errata against RFC 3143. From a quick read, at least two issues look fishy: 1) "2.1.1 Vary header is underspecified and/or misleading" (<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3143#section-2.1.1>) This includes an example using HTTP delta encoding, but *claims* that the problem also occurs in simpler cases. I'm not ready to believe that claim yet. 2) "2.2.2 Interception proxies prevent introduction of new HTTP methods" (<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3143#section-2.2.2>) This claims: A proxy that receives a request with a method unknown to it is required to generate an HTTP 501 Error as a response. HTTP methods are designed to be extensible so there may be applications deployed with initial support just for the user agent and origin server. An interception proxy that hijacks requests which include new methods destined for servers that have implemented those methods creates a de-facto firewall where none may be intended. ...without pointing out where RFC 2616 says that. Feedback appreciated, Julian
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2008 15:21:15 UTC