Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp-06.txt

Thanks Ben! I think these changes are great.

On the topic of mandatory-to-implement, I really don't see any value in
requiring servers to implement both upgrade tokens. When a client is
configured to use a (modern) proxy, it is provided with a list of (upgrade
token, URI template) pairs. The only risk is a world where a set of clients
only implements one upgrade token, and wishes to interoperate with a set of
servers that only implement the other upgrade token. I don't see how that
could happen. Today both implement unextended CONNECT, so if they want to
switch to templated connect, they already need to communicate this support
somehow. That communication will lead them to agree on which upgrade token
they want to use.

David

On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 8:35 AM Ben Schwartz <bemasc@meta.com> wrote:

> Hi HTTPBIS,
>
> The only change in this revision is related to support for the Capsule
> Protocol.  This draft now defines *two* Upgrade Tokens: "connect-tcp" and
> "connect-tcp-capsule".  For details, see the diff.
>
> The biggest question here is about which of these protocols should be
> mandatory to implement.  The current text says that servers must implement
> both, with an exception for cases where the pool of possible clients is
> restricted in some way.
>
> --Ben
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, October 21, 2024 5:00 PM
> *To:* i-d-announce@ietf.org <i-d-announce@ietf.org>
> *Cc:* ietf-http-wg@w3.org <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
> *Subject:* I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp-06.txt
>
>
>
> Internet-Draft draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp-06.txt is now available. It
> is a
> work item of the HTTP (HTTPBIS) WG of the IETF.
>
>    Title:   Template-Driven HTTP CONNECT Proxying for TCP
>    Author:  Benjamin M. Schwartz
>    Name:    draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp-06.txt
>    Pages:   14
>    Dates:   2024-10-21
>
> Abstract:
>
>    TCP proxying using HTTP CONNECT has long been part of the core HTTP
>    specification.  However, this proxying functionality has several
>    important deficiencies in modern HTTP environments.  This
>    specification defines an alternative HTTP proxy service configuration
>    for TCP connections.  This configuration is described by a URI
>    Template, similar to the CONNECT-UDP and CONNECT-IP protocols.
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp/__;!!Bt8RZUm9aw!9lHcsI0XiMaWVBXiDoflBfaCGQR4i-sSIGLdmlNn4X_BYp1d-76lfP_XUFyIvvCgtFdB3N5Q_GO_9bSgzvuutQ$
>
> There is also an HTML version available at:
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp-06.html__;!!Bt8RZUm9aw!9lHcsI0XiMaWVBXiDoflBfaCGQR4i-sSIGLdmlNn4X_BYp1d-76lfP_XUFyIvvCgtFdB3N5Q_GO_9bT3tKEMcw$
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp-06__;!!Bt8RZUm9aw!9lHcsI0XiMaWVBXiDoflBfaCGQR4i-sSIGLdmlNn4X_BYp1d-76lfP_XUFyIvvCgtFdB3N5Q_GO_9bSHAc4yBQ$
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>
>
>
>