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

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

From: Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 21:19:06 +0200
Message-ID: <53A4892A.40102@zinks.de>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
I think at least the SPDY proxy is not a split UA as it is possible to 
use a different proxy here. It is possible to downgrade to an HTTP/1.1 
proxy or configure a SPDY proxy of a different vendor into Chrome.

There are some general proxies which do some rendering in the proxy. Are 
those then split UA?

Roland


On 20.06.2014 21:08, Diego R. Lopez wrote:
> So the SPDY proxy and Chrome are a split UA as well? A general proxy 
> run by Microsoft for all IEs would be a split UA?
> It is not the software vendor "imposing" something to the user here as 
> well?
>
> On 20 Jun 2014, at 13:37 , Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com 
> <mailto:ekr@rtfm.com>> wrote:
>
>> I generally think of a split UA as being one where both sides are 
>> controlled
>> by the software vendor. E.g., Amazon sells you the Kindle Fire and they
>> also run the server side. That's different from having the enterprise 
>> impose
>> a proxy on a piece of software which someone else wrote and deployed.
>>
>> -Ekr
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Diego R. Lopez <diego@tid.es 
>> <mailto:diego@tid.es>> wrote:
>>
>>     Would not any proxy fall in this split UA category then? What
>>     differentiates a proxy from a split UA?
>>
>>     On 20 Jun 2014, at 11:59 , Martin Thomson
>>     <martin.thomson@gmail.com <mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     > On 20 June 2014 08:06, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de
>>     <mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de>> wrote:
>>     >> Finally, there are cases where part of the UA functionality is
>>     moved into
>>     >> the network, such as in Opera mini - do we consider that as
>>     "proxying" as
>>     >> well (methinks yes, because it shares most of the
>>     considerations of
>>     >> classical proxies).
>>     >
>>     > I don't tend to think of this as a proxy at all.  Split UA is
>>     the term
>>     > I've used casually with respect to Opera mini, Silk and others.
>>     > Really, this is just a software deployment choice.
>>     >
>>
>>
>>     --
>>     "Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"
>>
>>     Dr Diego R. Lopez
>>     Telefonica I+D
>>     http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/
>>
>>     e-mail: diego@tid.es <mailto:diego@tid.es>
>>     Tel: +34 913 129 041 <tel:%2B34%20913%20129%20041>
>>     Mobile: +34 682 051 091 <tel:%2B34%20682%20051%20091>
>>     -----------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>     ________________________________
>>
>>     Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede
>>     consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo
>>     electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
>>     This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only
>>     send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
>>     http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> "Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"
>
> Dr Diego R. Lopez
> Telefonica I+D
> http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/
>
> e-mail: diego@tid.es
> Tel:    +34 913 129 041
> Mobile: +34 682 051 091
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede 
> consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico 
> en el enlace situado más abajo.
> This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send 
> and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
> http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
Received on Friday, 20 June 2014 19:19:30 UTC

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