- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:32:09 +0100
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@measurement-factory.com>
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:55:56PM +1300, Adrien de Croy wrote: > > > > I can understand why someone would code some software that way, but I > don't think it's correct to call that a proxy. At least it's not HTTP > compliant. I 100% agree with you, that's why I stated that it was more of a gateway than a proxy. > It could be argued that strategy of proxy operation is simply not valid. Agreed too! The term "proxy" is often used when connections are re-established (TCP proxies) but I regularly repeat that in the HTTP terminology that's not enough to be called a proxy. An HTTP proxy is a well-defined entity that cannot simply be assumed by a TCP proxy. Regards, Willy
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2011 13:33:28 UTC