Re: [libcurl: http implementations]

From: Willy Tarreau <>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 14:49:21 +0200

Hi Aleks,

thanks for the link. That's really good news to see that they're working on consolidating the RFCs and errata. I was a bit bored to have to bring them everywhere when I needed something accurate. It looks like the new RFCs are scheduled for 19/12/2008. The wording is clearly better than previous ones. I think it's worth reading them to catch small mistakes and contact them about our findings (I've already noticed a few very minor ones such as missing quotes).

It's sad that the CONNECT method description remains so fuzzy. It looks like it was never meant to correctly work and that it will never do (it was initially proposed by a non HTTP-aware guy).

I've seen the spreadsheet below. Haproxy is already referenced in it, but I can't modify it to fill in the features and limitations. It will really be interesting to see an exhaustive compatibility matrix between products, as I'm sure there are incompatible combinations :-)

I'll email Mark Nottingham directly to send him the relevant data.


On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:03:04PM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote:
> Fyi.
> ----- Forwarded message from Daniel Stenberg -----
> From: Daniel Stenberg <see_lib_curl>
> To: libcurl hacking <>
> Subject: http implementations
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:26:25 +0200 (CEST)
> Hi!
> Mark Nottingham in the HTTP Working Group has initiated the work on
> putting together an overview of all (interesting) existing HTTP
> implementations. You can see the current state of this work in progress:
> --
> /
> ----- End forwarded message -----
Received on 2008/08/02 14:49

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 2008/08/02 15:00 CEST