Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-06.txt> (Forwarded HTTP Extension) to Proposed Standard

SM <> Tue, 10 July 2012 16:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BDD21F8634; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:52:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.564
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.035, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P0utcqN2F868; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:52:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0A8821F8645; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:52:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (IDENT:sm@localhost []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6AGqpjG004164; Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:52:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1341939178; bh=mZPx3PeuH+bsY8/6i8Q9ReQPixfSnCVngOTlCFC4g48=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=HUPVA5ygycSVm/Vkphj4tJIWoocS0uvgK/mo/aTzpxuUofkxRFS5Pvew0SiIj596f fYn/efZLpA6vO4FKNlGB36ZWt7dqF7xrI4Oet38Oj9ktkfVcI4OVN5NHBquGdH2PAt wbJYUvA/aGBVzpRbriqIEuD4I/Srg+HlhwEgisEk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1341939178;; bh=mZPx3PeuH+bsY8/6i8Q9ReQPixfSnCVngOTlCFC4g48=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=UEhpWh2ADvZXDdl/p1BYr/wLXq/6Ex+e+r1lDzoZlWAwFMLZYtd0re3Wd6D4Dcs6f DnEn4wKOJZdU+ZmcGAGcwUmALaFMJeeQRhdsLz+7I/Py9MkY3BRfWuNVCMluKDDaLT sQWlUYSBpTlDOFWnCNCWxX07KtEP60GZrzkKQxLM=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:43:43 -0700
To: Andreas Petersson <>
From: SM <>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-06.txt> (Forwarded HTTP Extension) to Proposed Standard
In-Reply-To: <20120710132825.5141babe@hetzer>
References: <> <> <> <20120710132825.5141babe@hetzer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <>,
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:52:37 -0000

Hi Andreas,
At 04:28 10-07-2012, Andreas Petersson wrote:
>I interpret it the other way around.
>It makes a deployer aware that there is also end user expectations
>to take into considerations.
>Removing it may work as well, but I think that less well reflects the
>discussion on the apps-list.

There is a thread at 
of the working group discussions.  There were views from three 
persons.  I am in agreement with Alissa on that text.  I'll "+1" her 
message at

>I think that will make parsing harder, and give no benefit at all.

It allows for more random bits of information.