Re: [hybi] Proposal for a clean way to detect non-HTTP compliant transparent proxies

[Willy Tarreau <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:01:02AM +1000, Greg Wilkins wrote:
> On 22 July 2010 10:38, Jamie Lokier <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > There's some discussion on another list about using a 1xx response to
> > indicate "request is being processed", for when the processing is slow
> > to produce a response.  The fact that is being taken seriously
> > suggests that at least some deployments do forward 1xx messages in the
> > way the standard requires.
> >
> 
> 
> We have users that definitely use the 102 processing response with success.

Nice to know. I think that it's simply forwarded as the 1xx rule just
like the 100 is.

> So there must be some network segments where this is possible.
> I've often thought that if 102 responses could have bodies and were exposed
> to the browser, then they would make an useful transport for comet style
> applications.

Very clever idea. You could use headers though, or even shorter messages
by playing with the reason string after the status code ;-)

Willy