Re: multipart, server-sent events, and

On Feb 19, 2008 2:30 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 19, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Robert Sayre wrote:
>
> > On Feb 19, 2008 1:50 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Probably the appropriate forum to make this proposal would be the
> >> IETF
> >> HTTP Working Group. I'll join the appropriate mailing list if others
> >> are interested in pursuing it there. In advance of this, we could
> >> agree by convention on an unofficial "Connection: x-pipeline" value
> >> to
> >> see how well this proposal works in practice.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >
> > It's a good idea, but some proxies forward hop-by-hop headers. :(
> > See <http://www.mnot.net/blog/2007/06/20/proxy_caching>
>
> That document mentions some proxies forwarding headers listed in
> "Connection", and some specific fixed hop-by-hop headers (Trailer, TE,
> Upgrade). But do any proxies actually forward the "Connection" header
> itself?

Maybe mnot can help us out. Mark?

> > FWIW, the next Firefox beta will have pipelining enabled for https. I
> > won't be surprised if we hit bad bugs. Falling back to https in
> > combination with your proposed connection token might be a fine idea.
>
> That would certainly remove the risk of mistaken forwarding of the
> "Connection" header.

I was hoping it would avoid buggy origin servers as well.

Firefox has some heuristics that avoid known-broken implementations,
but it probably isn't complete, and sometimes that information isn't
provided.

-- 

Robert Sayre

"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time."

Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 20:03:31 UTC