Exactly, do you really need to hoard all that content?
See it's strategic vision like this that gets you into that coveted Senior Terminator Solutions Architect position within malevolent sentient lifeforms like Skynet LLC.
Upper management potential here folks.
Remember, kill all humans!
Lucas shot first.
Cue maya/3dsmax fan boy or random internal troll encounter.
What is it like being the Paris Hilton of the Open Source Movement?
And that man's name was Eli Whitney.
METAPROTIP: When you meta correct someone's grammar, usage, or mechanics, it's more polite to add a topical comment as well.
"I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that. Great job in that last round of bowling though."
Oooh "router level redirect" that sounds serious. I bet it never occured to the creators of SSL/TLS that *routers* could be involved with transferring the traffic.
Sounds like a certain someone doesn't know how SSL/TLS works.
That's true. However, the browser is going to be the technology that ultimately allows the user to act. So as long as Google, Mozilla, etc make the security risks clear, everything should be okay.
The current set of browser security warnings are pretty effective (giant red screen with lots of scary text). If the end user still approves, it's their fault.
No, the summary is fucking retarded and sensationalist.
It's only trusted by you if you assert that it is. This proposal formalizes the act of notifying of an available proxy and allowing the user to trust (or not trust) said proxy.
That's a pretty impressive way to soak up mod points by saying nothing pertinent at all.
Just throw in tons of "Joe Sixpack can't" and "poor oppressed people."
"This document describes two alternative methods for an user-agent to
automatically discover and for an user to provide consent for a
Trusted Proxy to be securely involved when he or she is requesting an
HTTP URI resource over HTTP2 with TLS."