W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: :scheme and CONNECT method

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 15:13:43 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbcaTVktf0KMmDfuaT8LjfPwdTKR+t+DC7RAxg3VYR8RNg@mail.gmail.com>
To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <tatsuhiro.t@gmail.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 3:05 PM, William Chan (陈智昌)
<willchan@chromium.org> wrote:
> http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-proxy

Internet-Draft, please?

- James

> The CONNECT tunnel is implemented as Tatsuhiro-san described (the mapping is
> admittedly unclean). There are some complexities when you tunnel SPDY over
> SPDY due to multiplexing and flow control, but otherwise I think the rest is
> relatively straightforward, and indeed there are open source SPDY proxy
> implementations that support this like Tatsuhiro-san's.
> On Aug 13, 2013 11:51 PM, "James M Snell" <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I mean that, at some point, we ought to sit down and figure out a
>> better approach to handling this case because using CONNECT as
>> currently defined is really not a great fit and I'd rather not try to
>> just shoe horn something in with a bunch of new exception cases. If
>> Google has this working, please provide a detailed description on list
>> of what's being done so we can evaluate it.
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2013 22:14:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:14 UTC