On 23/10/2016 1:56 a.m., Antony Stone wrote: > Disclaimer: I am not a Squid developer. > > On Saturday 22 October 2016 at 14:43:55, garry wrote: > >> IMO: >> >> The only reason I believe [explains] why core developers of Squid tend to >> move HTTP violating settings from average users is to prevent possible >> abuse/misuse. > > I believe the reason is that one of Squid's goals is to be RFC compliant, It is. > therefore it does not contain features which violate HTTP. > None of the Squid dev agree with that conclusion. It would be nice, but is not realistic. Squid has two relevant builds; --disable-http-violations which adheres to the RFCs. Tollerant processing is written into the RFCs, so we do not have to violate them to interoperate with badly behaving other softwares. --enable-http-violations which either just does or allows the sysadmin to configure options that: * directly override SHOULD (NOT) requirements in the RFCs, and * directly overrides some MUST (NOT) requirements where we think they can be safely avoided, and * extend the RFC described behaviours in custom ways that may not work well but seem to have benefits. Amos _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
