W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: #462: Intermediaries and Alt-Svc [was: Alt-Svc related Chromium bug report (proxy related)]

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 16:42:34 +1200
Message-ID: <5354A1BA.2050806@treenet.co.nz>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 21/04/2014 3:08 p.m., Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> On 20 Apr 2014, at 4:36 pm, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>> The draft wording however is not limited to "proxies". Which was my
>> initial report of there being a problem.
> 
> Yes; we've discussed this a few times on-list, but it never seemed to have made it onto the issues list.
> 
> I've created <https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/462>.
> 
> Any thoughts about the suggestion there?

I think we should go with the SHOULD NOT. The cases that need to be
enumerated IMO are that the proxy either;
 a) drop the header completely (consumes with decision not to use the
alt service)
 b) uses the alt-service (as if it were the client)
 c) passes it on un-touched (the case being forced by the MUST NOT)

I agree that a proxy has no place adding/changing field values the
client gets. But consuming the header is a different proposition which
has several uses already mentioned.

Amos
Received on Monday, 21 April 2014 04:43:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:30 UTC