IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] #1: HTTP Compliance

Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> Wed, 21 July 2010 23:38 UTC

Return-Path: <jamie@shareable.org>
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 D89B33A6902 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 16:38:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.478
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.121, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 sbk1dP7o2DmW for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 16:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.shareable.org (mail2.shareable.org [80.68.89.115]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5994A3A6809 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 16:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jamie by mail2.shareable.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <jamie@shareable.org>) id 1Obiry-0000uQ-At; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:38:34 +0100
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:38:34 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Message-ID: <20100721233834.GG14589@shareable.org>
References: <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> <20100721151531.GA2990@1wt.eu> <AANLkTikjbPObJEObZWceYuC1g0bYTg+8-5eQJBWKjBr=@mail.gmail.com> <20100721154519.GA3243@1wt.eu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100721154519.GA3243@1wt.eu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
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 23:38:27 -0000

Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 08:22:11AM -0700, Roberto Peon wrote:
> > I believe Mike quoted numbers in an earlier thread.
> > 
> > Just to be sure we're talking about the same thing, I'm talking about the
> > UPGRADE feature of HTTP generically, and not as it applies to the current
> > draft Websocket spec.
> 
> I thought they were related to the current version since it also uses
> Upgrade. Anyway, even if some don't support it yet, it will be easy
> to detect bypass them based on simple rules.

Um, will it?  How would that work?

-- Jamie

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status