- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:53:33 +0000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- cc: Andreas Petersson <andreas@sbin.se>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@commscope.com>, Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <8F735513-6A44-4043-B7DA-EAE1E2FD1A0D@mnot.net>, Mark Nottingham wri tes: >> Forwarded: for=5.6.7.8:3456, for=8.9.1.2;by=4.5.6.7 >> Forwarded: for=1.2.3.4:5678;by=4.3.2.1:3128;proto=https This format needs a strict definition to be unambigious. For instance, if the first proxy adds only "for" and the next adds only "by", there is no way to tell if one or two proxies were involved. I still think it is a better idea that each proxy adds exactly one element, and that the single element contains whatever information the proxy is willing to disclose. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 07:53:59 UTC