- From: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 21:12:38 +0000
- To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
this issue has been raised before, but I wasn't aware of a satisfactory resolution. The target of this header is a proxy. It is proxies that set up tunnels. The feedback from proxy vendors on this proposed header seems to have been largely ignored. If I see Tunnel-Protocol: smtp Then I can presume it's either smtp or that there's a TLS layer in there as well, and if I want to know, then I have to sniff for a client hello packet. There is therefore what seems to be a deliberate ambiguity put into this spec which can only be resolved by sniffing. The stated purpose of the spec is to allow perhaps prioritisation of traffic or something. But any proxy interested in security (which they all are) is not going to blindly take an assertion from a client that it cannot verify and use that as a basis for allocation of priority resource. As for the assertion that "proxies do not implement the tunneled protocol", well.... what can I say to that? What if they do? It doesn't look like normative language to me. Proxies commonly actually DO implement such tunneled protocols. So I can only see this header going into the strip and ignore bucket. I just hope it doesn't create too much confusion further on in time. Adrien de Croy ------ Original Message ------ From: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> To: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Sent: 25/03/2015 3:24:59 p.m. Subject: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol >Everyone, > >As discussed in the WG meeting today, we don't have any open issues for >this product, so I believe it's ready. > >Therefore, this is the announcement of WGLC for: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol-02 > >Please review the document carefully, and comment on this list. > >WGLC will end on 10 April 2015 (I'm leaving a bit extra because this is >an IETF week). > >Cheers, > > >-- >Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2015 21:14:12 UTC