IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] #1: HTTP Compliance

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Wed, 21 July 2010 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <w@1wt.eu>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35C33A6359 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.723
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.723 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.680, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_IS_SMALL6=0.556]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FrfbqVMNKQrS for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1wt.eu (1wt.eu [62.212.114.60]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BF173A684B for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o6LFFV14003028; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:15:31 +0200
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:15:31 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Roberto Peon <fenix@google.com>
Message-ID: <20100721151531.GA2990@1wt.eu>
References: <15307.1274106895.116423@Sputnik> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005172259030.22838@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <20100518003753.GP20356@shareable.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005180229430.22838@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <20100518121245.GR20356@shareable.org> <AANLkTiniCjBwm5T59as8jByM5xDhPMrea-GqZFpWPAVS@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005182105360.22838@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <20100519013238.GB2318@shareable.org> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1007210108300.7242@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <AANLkTik5NXkKhV+d9skXpYa_afSwthmdf=LrTbXkzwRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik5NXkKhV+d9skXpYa_afSwthmdf=LrTbXkzwRQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] #1: HTTP Compliance
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:15:28 -0000

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 07:54:14AM -0700, Roberto Peon wrote:
> > (By extension, I think the Upgrade mechanism in HTTP isn't a particularly
> > good idea. The number of times the mechanism has been used to great
> > success on the Web somewhat supports my position on this, I think.)
> >
> 
> The UPGRADE mechanism was a fine idea. Poor transparent proxy
> implementations have killed its effectiveness.

Do we have reports of failures due to transparent proxies ? As of now,
the only failure I'm aware of is due to the unadvertised bytes which
is not compatible with HTTP.

Willy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email