Re: editorial issue TRANSPARENT-PROXY.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: rlgray@raleigh.ibm.com: "editorial issue TRANSPARENT-PROXY."
• Previous message: Dave Kristol: "Re: Rev-02 of the HTTP/1.1 specification has been submitted..."
• Maybe in reply to: Jim Gettys: "editorial issue TRANSPARENT-PROXY."

Jim Gettys wrote:
> 
> Here are some clarifications around proxies that Roy was kind enough
> to draft up, to clarify when requirements apply to transparent proxies
> vs. proxies performing other actions (e.g. annotation).
>                                 - Jim
> 
> View: Browse HTML    Browse Raw Text
> From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 15:34:23 -0800
> To: jg@w3.org
> Cc: masinter@parc.xerox.com, lawrence@agranat.com,
> dmk@research.bell-labs.com,
>         joshco@microsoft.com
> Subject: transparent proxy changes
> 
> As per our discussion this morning, I wrote up a definition for
> transparent and non-transparent proxies.  I also went through the rev-01
> spec and found all places where there is any difference between transparent
> and non-transparent behavior.  Changes are below.

I've read this fairly carefully. It looks OK to me.

Cheers,

Ben.

-- 
Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686|Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant  |Fax:   +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org
and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |Apache-SSL author
A.L. Digital Ltd,     |http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL
London, England.      |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache

• Next message: rlgray@raleigh.ibm.com: "editorial issue TRANSPARENT-PROXY."
• Previous message: Dave Kristol: "Re: Rev-02 of the HTTP/1.1 specification has been submitted..."
• Maybe in reply to: Jim Gettys: "editorial issue TRANSPARENT-PROXY."