- From: Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 22:12:40 +0200
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 12.06.2015 18:30, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 12 June 2015 at 01:32, Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de> wrote: >> In that spirit the client should use the alternate service as URL when >> looking up which proxy to use in a PAC file. But what is the corresponding >> URL to use, e.g. should http://www.service.com:443/, >> https://www.service.com/ or http_opportunistic_security://www.service.com/ >> be used? > Actually, I think not. That means that proxies could become the > source of routing problems for users, but the right way to address > this is to have the proxy understand alternative services. Or to > provide additional inputs, either to the CONNECT request or the query > to proxy.pac. So the additional input is missing so far in the text and there are no plans to add them. I find it confusing if sometimes proxies should be used and sometimes not depending on how the proxy to use is configured. Roland
Received on Friday, 12 June 2015 20:13:06 UTC