Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Mon, 14 May 2012 12:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2705521F8682 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 May 2012 05:41:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.733
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.733 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.266, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZDUf03459bbs for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 May 2012 05:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9F721F8450 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 May 2012 05:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1STuZD-0003Fv-1k for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:39:59 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1STuYx-0003Eh-Gk for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:39:43 +0000
Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1STuYp-0006yG-KI for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 14 May 2012 12:39:41 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id q4ECbksl003194; Mon, 14 May 2012 14:37:46 +0200
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 14:37:46 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Andreas Petersson <andreas@sbin.se>
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20120514123746.GJ1694@1wt.eu>
References: <4FA02AEA.1080407@isode.com> <0A15D230-F8D2-498F-894B-86A3C987C456@mnot.net> <aae9c9339c5d775b57e0371b609b9334@treenet.co.nz> <20120504113403.5a65e4ff@hetzer> <4FA5D74A.4020900@treenet.co.nz> <20120506055104.GB8105@1wt.eu> <20120514135554.551063c0@hetzer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120514135554.551063c0@hetzer>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.212.114.60; envelope-from=w@1wt.eu; helo=1wt.eu
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1STuYp-0006yG-KI 6b6cdbcd6e40b7a4ebed6538285d2090
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-02.txt - section 5.1
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20120514123746.GJ1694@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/13536
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1STuZD-0003Fv-1k@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 12:39:59 +0000

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 01:55:54PM +0200, Andreas Petersson wrote:
> On Sun, 6 May 2012 07:51:04 +0200
> Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> > I'm used to see a similar thing at places where front SSL-offload caches
> > are installed. The instance name which receives the connection is named
> > in requests going to the backend servers, and it holds the name of the
> > application or of the customer, which is a 1:1 association from the
> > listening ip:port. I too think that we should allow a slightly larger
> > alphabet to permit "[:._-]" and possibly a few other characters. Some
> > people might also want to name the incoming interface on transparent
> > intercepting proxies. It's likely that the few chars above are enough
> > to unambiguously name network interfaces.
> > 
> > Given that the underscore has a special meaning when stated first, we
> > could have the chars above only allowed after a first ALPHANUM character.
> > 
> > What do others think ?
> 
> I think it would be enough to say they are only valid in obfnode and
> obfport. obfnode and obfport always starts with "_". It should also be
> noted that the use of "[:]" requires the value to be quoted.

That's a good point. I must say I've never seen a Location or Referer
header being quoted despite their wide use of "[/:]" which are marked
as special chars. I'll raise a new issue on this subject.

Willy