- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2019 07:09:12 +0000
- To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
-------- In message <c28bcb44-f10c-e216-d9df-3e2cf985d931@treenet.co.nz>, Amos Jeffries writes: >So IMO the issue is not whether CONNECT is hop-by-hop, but whether the >intermediary is mapping the CONNECT to TCP directly or to another >HTTP-message. If it is to another HTTP-message (eg CONNECT to a peer) >the end-to-end headers still apply to that (non-)payload sent to the >next-hop, the hop-by-hop headers do not. My understanding: Client sends CONNECT to proxy1 Proxy1 interprets this as "Please open TCP connection to ____" If Proxy1 is configured to always use Proxy2, the only way Proxy1 can serve this request, is by sending a CONNECT to proxy2. If my understanding is correct, then CONNECT is hop-by-hop, but depending on the proxy configuration, CONNECTs may be chained until some proxy in the chain is allowed/can do the direct TCP connection. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Saturday, 20 April 2019 07:09:41 UTC