- From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:34:57 +0200
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
lör 2009-07-18 klockan 00:01 +1200 skrev Adrien de Croy: > Section 2.4 looks ambitious!!! is that what I think it is? Intercepting > the TCP connection? Even though WinGate does it, and clients want it, > we recommend against it. It does horrible things to auth. Found it i thing.. p1 2.4 Yes that is about intercepting the TCP connection. But still unclear to me what the section is to say other than mentioning that such technique has been deployed. Not sure the specifications should define a profile for those (or to be precise I think not). There is a fair bit of things in the specs which isn't worded with port 80 interception in mind, and the implications of that is best left outside the spec imho as things start to get very muddled if we try to account for this use case even if commonly deployed today. Regards Henrik
Received on Friday, 17 July 2009 12:35:50 UTC