On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 10:05 AM Jérémy Lecour <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 10:56 AM Poul-Henning Kamp <[email protected]> > wrote: > > not everybody reads RFCs recreationally... > > What ?? I'm shocked ! :D > > I spent 2 hours last night reading parts of the RFC9110 about HTTP and I've > learnt a lot about HTTP headers. > > For example, the "X-" prefix for non-standard headers has been deprecated > since 2012. > It was a good idea in theory but proven to be counter productive, based on > the long running experimentation in email and SIP (and HTTP). > > For Varnish I guess we're stuck with the X- prefix since it became a de-facto > standard.
We can always rename X-Varnish to something else but we'd need a good reason to break existing setups. On the other hand you have the ability to rename the header in VCL and have access to the req.xid and bereq.xid variables to build your own transaction tracking header. Cheers _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
