Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-*

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 29 July 2013 13:32 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 8BCCB21F9FDA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 qI8a7fP2eVNg for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BADBA21F9F80 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:32:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1V3nXy-0001Bq-Ei for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:31:34 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:31:34 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1V3nXy-0001Bq-Ei@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1V3nXn-0001AV-L1 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:31:23 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1V3nXm-0004AJ-FW for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:31:23 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.104] ([217.91.35.233]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Me4Ly-1UiHbt2ypa-00PtkT for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 15:30:55 +0200
Message-ID: <51F66E8D.1090109@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 15:30:53 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <76583F5C-A175-42EA-B0A0-CB5663A5E3AC@mnot.net> <9E71BAB0-0D88-4B6E-B1A1-AA228349E3CA@gbiv.com> <27ED39F0-723C-4358-9A22-4AAEEC1BA912@mnot.net> <37ABC670-148B-4D7A-AE21-6692EFFC122F@gbiv.com> <3257D0DA-F6FA-4E24-919C-C4FB4864F69E@mnot.net> <51F4FB7F.3050807@gmx.de> <D9E38713-A86F-47BE-9124-D4EA88700BD3@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <D9E38713-A86F-47BE-9124-D4EA88700BD3@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:j71lqWEHdQjk4LXTUK8G+viF4Ry9ECQ0Wx1PRwnV9pB+coZ3BZv hUyte2bGIt1oK5gKtPJzct8d1zN3UrIF7KhBKWT992cL+b0WxI8JsEXOCag2d+/rbDU5Erq W01bQUSv2fwauywlUYkdBb5k6gmXaYE1lUYxDg3I/XE3xxZ4oSOu24cm3B86j/I3A7/WJsO ZaUFxoMCpE3gW5oriBPxg==
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.19; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.450, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1V3nXm-0004AJ-FW db531d5a8f0ce5f3a71bb7f66554dd05
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: #473, was: p7: forwarding Proxy-*
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/51F66E8D.1090109@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18953
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 2013-07-29 14:31, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> The conclusion of the conversation was Roy's statement:
>
>> No, I am just saying that Connection is not required; if it is not
>> included in Connection, then the intention is that it be forwarded
>> until consumed.  OTOH, if it is included in Connection, then it
>> will be consumed or deleted by the immediate recipient.  AFAIK,
>> these fields are not normally included in Connection, but there
>> might be a good reason to if the proxy selection is complicated.
>
> Which seems reasonable and no one has objected. However, p7 still says:
>
>> Unlike WWW-Authenticate, the Proxy-Authenticate header field applies only to the current connection, and intermediaries should not forward it to downstream clients. However, an intermediate proxy might need to obtain its own credentials by requesting them from the downstream client, which in some circumstances will appear as if the proxy is forwarding the Proxy-Authenticate header field.

Out of curiosity: why does the "SHOULD NOT" show up as "should not"?

> … with similar text for Proxy-Authorization. The "SHOULD NOT forward…" requirement is in conflict with the sentiment expressed above.
>
> I've changed the target to p7.

OK.

So maybe change

   "Unlike WWW-Authenticate, the Proxy-Authenticate header field applies 
only to the current connection, and intermediaries SHOULD NOT forward it 
to downstream clients."

to

   "Unlike WWW-Authenticate, the Proxy-Authenticate header field applies 
only to the current connection, and *proxies* SHOULD NOT forward it to 
downstream clients."

This would allow non-proxy intermediaries to forward it.

Best regards, Julian