<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 12/3/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Tony Garnock-Jones</b> <<a href="mailto:tonyg@lshift.net">tonyg@lshift.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
David Pollak wrote:<br>> I'm not sure that works so well. Many corporate firewalls have HTTP<br>> proxies. They expect well formed HTTP.<br><br>One thing I've been thinking about for a little while now is use of
<br>HTTP/1.1's "Upgrade" header - cf. <a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2817.txt">http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2817.txt</a>.<br><br>A normal HTTP/1.1 request could arrive at an HTTP-speaking port, and<br>through use of the "Upgrade" header, we could switch to AMQP.
<br><br>Would the proxies filter out the "Upgrade" header, do you think?</blockquote><div><br>Probably not. That's interesting. <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Regards,<br> Tony<br>--<br> [][][] Tony Garnock-Jones | Mob: +44 (0)7905 974 211<br> [][] LShift Ltd | Tel: +44 (0)20 7729 7060<br> [] [] <a href="http://www.lshift.net/">http://www.lshift.net/</a> | Email:
<a href="mailto:tonyg@lshift.net">tonyg@lshift.net</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>lift, the secure, simple, powerful web framework <a href="http://liftweb.net">http://liftweb.net</a><br>Collaborative Task Management
<a href="http://much4.us">http://much4.us</a>