W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

RE: HTTPbis -10 drafts published : Connection header

From: Thomson, Martin <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:08:39 +0800
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
CC: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03E9DCD3BC@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
> > Yes, but why is that a problem?  First, the process adding headers
> > should have already removed the Connection header received -- otherwise
> > it isn't doing its job.  Second, even without fixing that bug, the
> > result is fail safe -- the proxy won't be able to forward what it
> > generated.
> It's not a problem from an HTTP point of view, the request is valid. It's

I don't see why you are belabouring the point.  Especially when it is predicated on a software error.

If the client wants a header to go to the origin server, don't use Connection.  If a proxy wants to ensure a particular header is set in a particular way, set that header.

Yes, you can probably screw up all sorts of things by doing all sorts of dumb things.  It's pointless compromising the integrity of a perfectly sound specification so that you can club a few idiots over the head with it.  That's a self-defeating principle - the idiots will simply find another dumb thing to do that you couldn't predict.

Your solution here is to submit a bug report.

Received on Friday, 16 July 2010 05:07:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:47 UTC