- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:18:48 +1200
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 18/07/11 14:51, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Jul 17, 2011, at 6:19 PM, Adrien de Croy wrote: > >> For an intermediary, Upgrade + 101 needs to be handled like CONNECT + 200. > > No. Look, I don't know how any of you got the impression that Upgrade > is a request to turn into a tunnel, but that simply is not the case. Not all middleware tunnels CONNECT. Some switch to a new protocol and process the internal CONNECT octets in accordance with that protocol spec. But only if they support and implement that protocol. Given that implementing each new protocol takes time, and people are _already_ using Upgrade to switch to random other non-HTTP protocols. Telnet, SSH, WebSockets already happening. The alternative is to terminate with 4xx any request containing Upgrade: and a protocol not supported by that middleware. You may like that, but the reality is a needless burden on support helpdesks when a blind end-to-end packet relay is already in the toolkit and will work. > It cannot be implemented that way. Please don't try. You are not supposed > to upgrade the connection if you don't know how to upgrade the connection. I'm not talking about implementing Upgrade. The client and origin may be the only places where that is possible (as is the case for WebSockets). Merely transiting requests which use it. AYJ
Received on Monday, 18 July 2011 05:19:27 UTC