mån 2010-08-16 klockan 13:30 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov:
> Since Squid is a program and not a human being, we do need to hard-code
> a single default. Clearly, there will be ACLs to change the behavior,
> but if no options apply, we still need to do something.
>
> Yu have more-or-less said "no" to every option I listed :-). Correct me
> if I am wrong, but I sense that option #1 (always send chunked request)
> is the "least bad" default. I will try to implement that unless you stop me.
I did not say no, just the complications each proposal involves..
The correct per spec is to reject with 411 unless next hop is known to
be 1.1.
Alternatively dechunk if we have already received the full body (by
waiting a little, not sending 100 Continue)
> An interception client is arguably more likely to know the next hop
> capabilities because it thinks it is talking directly to that hop.
I would argue the opposite. It's less likely to make a correct decision
as it do not expect the proxy to be there messing with things so it
quite likely will take the response version of the proxy as an
indication of the origin server capabilities not caring to look for Via
etc..
> Similarly, we are less likely to be blamed for screwing things up if we
> just repeat what the intercepted client did.
Until someone slaps us with the specifications.
Regards
Henrik
Received on Mon Aug 16 2010 - 19:52:08 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Aug 17 2010 - 12:00:04 MDT