On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 12:21:52AM -0700, David Morris wrote: > > > On Sat, 20 Apr 2013, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > > > > p1 Section 2.3 says: > > > > > However, an HTTP-to-HTTP gateway that wishes to interoperate with > > > third-party HTTP servers must conform to HTTP user agent requirements > > > on the gateway's inbound connection and must implement the Connection > > > (Section 6.1) and Via (Section 5.7.1) header fields for both > > > connections. > > > > This means that accelerators and CDNs MUST generate a Via header on the > > outbound connection. This isn't widely practiced, and I'm not sure it's > > necessary. Comments? > > I don't care about MUST, but I think the Via header can be useful for > problem determination. A smart content server could also adjust for > a detected accelerator and/or transcoder ... perhaps by avoiding > optimizations dependant on a direct connection and byte/byte transfer > between the client and the server. > > So I'm very much in favor of keeping the Via: header. OK but Mark is not discussing about removing it but keeping the MUST since a number of existing products already don't add it and will not for some of the reasons mentionned in this thread. So I think that based on your feedback this MUST should be turned into a SHOULD. Willy