On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, Simon Liu wrote:
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?
There is no standard "Proxy-Agent" header. Proxies are supposed to advertise themselves in the Via header if they want to (RFC 2616 14.45)
It may be worth noticing that HTTP/0.9 support may be optionally dropped from later revisions of Squid due to security reasons. Having support for HTTP/0.9 is recommended but not required by the current HTTP specifications, and the problem is that having this support allows for abuse of the HTTP proxy to proxy various kinds of non-HTTP traffic and in many situations this is not wanted much like how you abuse it to proxy Shoutcast streams.
So in other words designing your application to support such abuse of HTTP proxies is just a short-term fix. To be viable in a more long term you should look into supporting SOCKS proxies as well, which is a proxy protocol much more suited for what you are doing, or if you want to continue piercing corporate firewalls in this manner convince the makers of servers to add HTTP gateways to their servers (often barely more than to add a reasonable HTTP header to the reply).
Regards Henrik
