Re: [squid-users] HTTP/1.0 vs. HTTP/1.1 v2.4Stable2

> On Wednesday 14 November 2001 14.07, Troels Arvin wrote:
> > I suppose that you could faily easily patch Squid to change the
> > announced HTTP version.
>
> If you accept that most dynamic content then will break when the server
> replies with a HTTP/1.1 reply Squid does not know how to deal with (chunked
> encoding).
>
> > > Should I use version 2.2 in order to access sites requireing HTTP/1.1?
> >
> > I have never tried Squid versions older than v. 2.4, but I assume that
> > they also announce HTTP v. 1.0.
>
> They do. Required by HTTP specifications until all required parts of
> HTTP/1.1 is supported. If Squid did not, things would break badly as
> HTTP/1.1 works differently from HTTP/1.0.
>
> > I have never seen a site which rejects user agents announcing HTTP/1.0,
> > and Squid supports HTTP/1.1's "Host: ..." requeste header, so things
> > _should_ be fine.
>
> Same here.
>
> What is the reason to needing to forward as HTTP/1.1? It is quite likely
> that if you are having problems then the problems are due to something else
> than the HTTP/1.0 downgrade.
>
> Regards
> Henrik Nordström
> Squid Hacker

persistent connections in accelerator mode?
Can I improve the interaction between squid and apache by using HTTP/1.1?

Regards
 
Oliver Fänger
Received on Fri Nov 23 2001 - 06:23:56 MST