Re: processing of ICAP Transfer-Ignore options

Yes, the file extension is vague, hence my original question.

However, Squid 3.1 thinks that the file extension is the last bit
of the URL after the last dot (like if the URL had a filename suffix).

It seems logical to strip the CGI parameters before evaluating the
file extension.

I studied a lot of URLs, the "file extension" and Content-Type
and it turns out that the file extension is far more reliable
as an indicator of the content type than the Content-Type itself.

Best regards,
Marcus

On 04/13/2012 06:42 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote:
> fre 2012-04-13 klockan 13:21 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov:
>
>> Yes, but primarily because the "extension" is not clearly defined. This
>> is something we can address in ICAP Errata, I guess: Provide a
>> definition of what should be considered a "file extension", with a
>> disclaimer that not all agents will use the definition provided. It
>> would not solve all the problems but would be better than doing nothing.
>
> ICAP was designed for HTTP. HTTP does not have file name extensions,
> HTTP have content types.
>
> Regards
> Henrik
>
>
>
Received on Sat Apr 14 2012 - 22:47:37 MDT