IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: The future of forward proxy servers in an http/2 over TLS world

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Fri, 17 February 2017 06:50 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E27128874 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:50:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 mvxVpCaReERP for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:50:16 -0800 (PST)
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 3C40F120725 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:50:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cecJg-0002n7-Mp for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:46:52 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:46:52 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cecJg-0002n7-Mp@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1cecJb-0002m8-Ji for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:46:47 +0000
Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60] helo=1wt.eu) by mimas.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1cecJV-0003eS-6O for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:46:42 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id v1H6k4gV021717; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 07:46:04 +0100
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 07:46:04 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Cc: Tom Bergan <tombergan@chromium.org>, Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20170217064604.GC21674@1wt.eu>
References: <emde1bfa93-84c0-49f7-83a4-b9bed24e0276@bodybag> <CA+3+x5GV9MdYOP3gHLABe+=GVVKf7ugbMWHquuzVHGCbwY-s5w@mail.gmail.com> <6ff3c0ab-0e67-c175-194e-dbd8fbb55788@measurement-factory.com> <CA+3+x5HfMLgOyU+dONxMFi82OmC5EybrqmyVRRCi3nmw3PEJkQ@mail.gmail.com> <em3cc9489c-e2f3-43bc-b467-234845d53cd4@bodybag>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <em3cc9489c-e2f3-43bc-b467-234845d53cd4@bodybag>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.212.114.60; envelope-from=w@1wt.eu; helo=1wt.eu
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.943, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1cecJV-0003eS-6O 232e30ff2377ee51a247a312c58d5c91
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: The future of forward proxy servers in an http/2 over TLS world
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20170217064604.GC21674@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33568
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>

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 08:35:47PM +0000, Adrien de Croy wrote:
> So central control is required, and this is a proxy.

And there are many "old" large companies having a pre-RFC1918 internal
network where there's no option but using a proxy for connectivity with
the net. In these situations there's an even more compelling desire to
install the access control on such proxies.

Willy

v2.27.6 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status