On 14.12.2013 09:36, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > I beg to differ. We are left with a question of whether you are > responsible to defend the current behavior, or whether I can simply > rely on RFC2817 to document that you are wrong,
RFC 2817 is irrelevant in the context of https: URIs (see its abstract and section 8.1). > or whether I'm > instead responsible to identify user-agent by user-agent those which > comply with RFC2817's examples. I don't think that any remotely common browser is doing RFC2817-style requests these days (neither is mod_ssl doing in client mode, when proxying SSL requests). See also section 8.1 for the can of worms this potentially opens up when "'http' [were used] to identify both secure and non-secure resources"). > So how do you want to do this, or > would you like to return to a discussion of ProxyPass in the forward > proxy context? ProxyPass is not involved in the SSL forward proxy case at all, as I already tried to point out. Just unload mod_proxy_http and mod_ssl from the configuration, and you'll find that forward proxying https:// requests continues to work perfectly, i.e. is completely unaffected by any code in these two modules (mod_proxy_connect is all it takes). Kaspar
