- From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>
- Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:34:57 +0200
- To: "Patrick Pelletier" <code@funwithsoftware.org>
- Cc: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, perpass@ietf.org
Le Ven 13 septembre 2013 21:18, Patrick Pelletier a écrit : > And, of course, using the simplified User-Agent strings was just one > of my two proposals. My other proposal, which was even simpler, > though perhaps more radical, was to downgrade the requirement on User- > Agent from SHOULD to MAY, and encourage browsers not to send User- > Agent at all. (We could even change it to a SHOULD NOT if we feel > really heavy-handed.) Please don't. If any change it from SHOULD to MUST User-Agent is invaluable for filtering out pathologic web clients in a network without bothering legitimate users. And in fact 9 web clients out of ten that do not declare user-agent are broken one way or another protocol-wise (and they're a PITA because you can't filter them out without breaking the few correctly implemented clients that take advantage of the SHOULD) In fact no-user-agent should be "I swear on the penalty of [insert cruel and deserved punishment] to never take liberties with the HTTP protocol and never add a bug to my software". Right now no-user-agent-is "I don't want to understand HTTP but it gets me through the firewall, simulate a real web client and only implement the parts I need most of the time with no error handling except for retrying in a loop with no sleeps" -- Nicolas Mailhot
Received on Monday, 16 September 2013 16:35:33 UTC