Hi Henrik, > Why would one request Shoutcast servers via a HTTP proxy? Some users are at work, and I guess their corporate network routes all traffic through their proxies. > Why? Squid sends you the reply as-is, thinking the server is a obsolete > HTTP/0.9 server sending just raw unlabelled data. That's the behaviour I would have expected from any proxy - to be as transparent as possible. BTW: What's the rule of thumb concerning the "Proxy-agent" header? Do proxies normally insert this into any valid HTTP response, so that the receiving client knows it came from a proxy? > > ******** Netscape Proxy ********* > > HTTP/1.0 200 Ok > > Proxy-agent: Netscape-Proxy/3.51 > > Date: Wednesday, 02-Mar-05 23:10:51 GMT > > Content-type: audio/mpeg > > Via: 1.1 S1PS > > ******** End Netscape Proxy ********* > > > > ICY 200 OK > > icy-notice1... > > ... > > ... > > Interesting, but also a little bit of a lie.. the real content-type is a > shoutcast stream including the shoutcast header, not an mpeg audio > object.. Yep... I'm not sure why the proxy is doing this. I guess I'll just have to workaround this in my application. I thought I'd ask you guys in case there was a general case which I could test against, but it seems this is a strange situation. Thanks. --Simon > I wonder if they just happened to pick up the content-type from > the shoutcast stream header by mistake from it resembling HTTP, or > deliberately have support for inspecting shoutcast headers and extracting > the content type. My bet is on the first... > > Regards > Henrik >
