Re: Interest in a UDP equivalent to the CONNECT method

On 07/02/18 07:44, Göran Eriksson AP wrote:
>  
> 
> Apologies if I missed anything out.
> 
>  
> 
> Based on this feedback I’m inclined to write up a more rounded technical
> proposal to help frame further discussion. This might separate out the
> WebRTC theme to disentangle the different aspects.
> 
>  
> 
> When writing up the proposal, I would be hoping for a clarification
> about what kind of proxy we’re addressing, meaning being clear on
> “forward” or “reverse proxy” context.
> 
>  
> 
> I understand that this could potentially be left out from the draft
> given one limits the scope of the draft, but the example you gave in
> previous email- the “web proxy” configured in the browser- is a forward
> proxy as I see it, and the reverse proxy case, where the origin
> redirects the client to an end point indicating use of proxy(ies) is an
> interesting use case also.
> 

And then there are gateway proxies. Which are not configured in the
Browser and may not even be easily visible to it several hops down a
relay chain.

Amos

Received on Tuesday, 6 February 2018 19:23:24 UTC