cURL / Mailing Lists / curl-library / Single Mail


Re: HTTP Pipelining Contributions

From: George Rizkalla <>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:19:21 +0000

On 7/25/12 11:44 AM, Fabian Keil wrote:
>How do you intend to deal with HTTP proxies?
>If an HTTP proxy is used, the socket isn't directly connected to the
>server and may be used for requests to different servers. curl already
>does that.
>It's also possible that the server supports pipelining while the
>proxy does not (or only poorly).

The proxied case is a bit trickier to get right. Nottingham suggests some
methods for faulty proxy detection: .

Joe and I had some discussion about where we believe the best place for
implementing this sort of faulty proxy detection is. Our inclination was
to keep this out of the protocol stack itself (although we're certainly
open to suggestions!).

If a client is going through a faulty proxy, there are two cases to be
dealt with:

(1) The client is going through a transparent faulty proxy (i.e. We don't
have an identifiable host)
(2) The client is going through a non-transparent faulty proxy (i.e. We
have an identifiable host)

For (1), the application might simply disable pipelining entirely.

For (2), it might make most sense for the app to pass in a proxy blacklist
just as it would a standard host blacklist.

Does that seem reasonable?

This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.

List admin:
Received on 2012-07-25