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

Proxies (includes call for adopting new work item, call for input)

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 14:58:52 -0400
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Message-Id: <ED83D202-A700-4BD2-8E68-AA6764E91E2B@mnot.net>
To: Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
Hi Sal,

On 12 Jun 2014, at 4:28 pm, Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com> wrote:

> thanks to the productive meeting in NewYork we are almost done with HTTP/2,
> this is really great.
> As currently we have almost no issues open on HTTP2, 
> perhaps we can take the opportunity to spend some time during the IETF in Toronto
> (in the case the wg decides to meet in Toronto) to start to talk more about proxies 
> and how to accommodate them in the new reality.

Absolutely. Now that HTTP/1 has shipped and HTTP/2 is moving towards a more quiet phase, we can indeed turn to other things (with the understanding that thereís still work to do on HTTP/2 that will take priority when necessary). 

> during the last months there have been several drafts authored by several people
> describing problems about proxies, listening requirements and some drafting possible solutions;
> and also good discussions about proxies in this mailing list and during the non official day in London
> so we should have already enough to discuss and maybe we might also make some good progress
> at least on the draft describing the proxy problems.

So far, the proxy-related work that seems to have some level of consensus to continue upon has been:

## HTTP Proxy Problems

IIRC Julian volunteered to edit this if we choose to adopt it. Julian, is that still the case?

Do people support adopting this as a WG Draft (with a target of Informational)? If not, please explain why.

## Autoproxy.pac format

There was also significant interest in standardising the autoproxy.pac format, possibly extending or refining it along the way. However, we havenít seen any drafts or discussion of that. Is anyone planning to propose something here?

## UX

Another thing mentioned in the London DTM was the need for UX. We said there (and I still agree) that this is *not* the venue for that discussion, but it needs to happen somewhere, and itís likely to block what we do. Is anyone aware of a place where that is happening (W3C seems like an obvious possibility, but I havenít heard anything from them)?

Beyond that, I think weíre still in the discussion phase. Are there other proxy-related work items people have in mind?


Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 13 June 2014 18:59:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC