- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2017 22:07:08 +0200
- To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
- Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints@ietf.org, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2017-08-05 21:26, Adam Roach wrote: > On 8/3/17 9:31 PM, Kazuho Oku wrote: >> Consider the case where a proxy that cannot correctly handle an >> informational response is involved. If the client sets a HTTP header >> indicating that it is capable of receiving 103, the proxy will simply >> pass through the header. Therefore, it would become a false signal to >> the server. > > > Thanks for the explanation. This seems reasonable. I'm still a bit > uneasy about the implied encouragement to user-agent-string sniffing, > but the intended status of "experimental" makes me worry about it much > less than I would otherwise. Hopefully, we can learn from this > experiment how pervasive incorrect handing of 100-class responses in > general is for HTTP clients. Quite pervasive. See, for instance, <http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=8170305>. Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 5 August 2017 20:07:50 UTC