- From: Eric Lawrence <ericlaw@exchange.microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 17:07:02 +0000
- To: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I believe the last number I heard for WPAD was 3% of users rely upon it. -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Stenberg [mailto:daniel@haxx.se] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2012 11:42 PM To: Amos Jeffries Cc: HTTP Working Group Subject: proxy config (was Re: multiplexing -- don't do it) On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Amos Jeffries wrote: > On top of that WPAD is still a non-standard mess not supported by > non-browser agents The reason "non-browser agents" don't support it - I claim - is that there's just no significant number of users who need it. I'm the main author of curl, during its 14 years of existance not a single user has asked for WPAD support... PAC however, people has asked for, but that's a javascript mess not easily supported by a mere "non-browser agent". I would claim we in the HTTP world haven't found the optimal solution for this yet. Unfortunately. -- / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2012 17:07:43 UTC