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

Re: explicitly authenticated proxy: new draft

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:55:58 +0200
Message-ID: <539FD86E.7030307@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
CC: "Diego R. Lopez" <diego@tid.es>, Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>, Martin Nilsson <nilsson@opera.com>, "<ietf-http-wg@w3.org>" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2014-06-17 03:32, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Right.
>
> I think the most obvious way to attack this is to discuss whether the OE/OS (whatever we end up calling it) draft might specify how UAs MUST/SHOULD/MAY behave when sending a http:// request to a *configured* proxy (when the UA supports OE).
>
> I don't yet understand the need for different ALPN tokens, cert attributes, etc., unless people are also thinking about non-configured ("transparent") proxies -- which this WG have explicitly and deliberately *not* codified for a long, long time -- or expanding this scheme to also cover HTTPS URIs...
>
> Cheers,

Well, this WG hasn't really worked on proxies at all, so picking on that 
specific aspect seems to be a bit far-fetched.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2014 05:58:26 UTC

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