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: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 17:34:25 +0200
Message-ID: <53A6F781.3030501@gmx.de>
To: Martin Nilsson <nilsson@opera.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2014-06-22 16:59, Martin Nilsson wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:44:33 +0200, Julian Reschke
> <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 2014-06-21 23:18, Martin Nilsson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 17:06:31 +0200, Julian Reschke
>>> <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 would like to hear why you think it shares considerations with
>>> classical proxies. My gut response would be that it isn't in scope.
>> Terminating TLS "somewhere else" would be one consideration. (Like it
>> or not)
> Opera Mini doesn't use TLS though, and the data inside the encrypted
> layer isn't standardized. We could of course move to use TLS, and how
> that would work could be documented. E.g. private protocols could have a
> name space in ALPN.

What I meant is that if I access a HTTPS URI from Opera Mini, the TLS 
connection will not be terminated on the UA but on an Opera server.


Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 22 June 2014 15:36:46 UTC

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