IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Moderator Action] Header addition with HTTP 2.0

Bence Béky <bnc@google.com> Tue, 31 March 2015 20:39 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB011A8734 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:39:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.989
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U8eFihR9YAh2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F5841A870D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Yd2tx-0000Jx-76 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:36:45 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Yd2tx-0000Jx-76@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1Yd2to-0000Is-IT for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:36:36 +0000
Received: from raoul.w3.org ([128.30.52.128]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1Yd2to-0000XM-6U for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:36:36 +0000
Received: from homard.platy.net ([80.67.176.7] helo=[192.168.1.37]) by raoul.w3.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1Yd2tn-0002zQ-Pw for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:36:35 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: Vimala Tadepalli <vimla.c@gmail.com>
From: Bence Béky <bnc@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKwtvnAtuF-X3pgbgLe7VAdnMd4+Yy1EeZLaHgyXXTnZRBgFZw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:00:02 +0000
Cc: HTTP <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 22:36:33 +0200
Message-Id: <CACMu3toR56=u+XG1qtGD=HP9Sy32rd_23QNRMzX3+XwucFYxhA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Name-Md5: efe3dad792d606410c9cc49cedaffc94
References: <CAKwtvnAtuF-X3pgbgLe7VAdnMd4+Yy1EeZLaHgyXXTnZRBgFZw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=1.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, W3C_NW=1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Yd2to-0000XM-6U af91125cd4e7957ae48508baa3eef6ff
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Moderator Action] Header addition with HTTP 2.0
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CACMu3toR56=u+XG1qtGD=HP9Sy32rd_23QNRMzX3+XwucFYxhA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/29137
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>

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Vimala Tadepalli <vimla.c@gmail.com> wrote:
> In HTTP 2.0, can i do this?
> If a header is added at firewall, client and server dynamic tables might go
> out of sync. Will it cause any issues?

Good question.  My understanding is that the firewall is supposed to
re-encode the header.  That is, it should maintain a dynamic table on
its connection with the client that stays in sync with that of the
client, decode the header block using this dynamic table, and
re-encode it towards the server using a context that is in sync with
the server.

Cheers,

Bence

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status