- From: Lisa Lippert (Dusseault) <lisal@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 10:21:50 -0800
- To: "'Joe Orton'" <joe@orton.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: "'David Engberg'" <dave.engberg@driveway.com>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Would this information be suitable on a page for the webdav.org site? Might even put some pressure on proxy developers to support RFC 2518, and to allow their administrators to name additional methods that should be allowed over HTTP (e.g. so that new advanced collections or DASL commands can be added). Lisa -----Original Message----- From: Joe Orton [mailto:joe@orton.demon.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 5:10 AM To: Lisa Lippert (Dusseault) Cc: 'David Engberg'; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org Subject: Re: WebDAV proxy problems > I actually started collecting some information on this. Since I don't have > testing resources for it, it's only hearsay, but here goes: > > Known Proxies that support DAV > > - MS Proxy 2.0: Support for DAV is built-in to MS Proxy 2.0. > - Squid: There is a patch for the Squid proxy server that adds support for > WebDAV (http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v2/2.2/bugs/). Apache mod_proxy works fine too. IIRC Squid 2.3 will pass through the methods defined in 2518, but will still block methods it doesn't understand. joe
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2000 13:31:59 UTC