-1
I hate to do this but I really feel like we went backwards on this change.
> On Mar 11, 2020, at 3:03 PM, Bill Burcham wrote:
> PoolFactory {
> setProxyAddress(String host, int port);
> }
>
> ClientCacheFactory {
> setPoolProxyAddress(String host, int port);
> }
It gives the user no infor
+1 to Bill's proposal.
-Dan
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:10 PM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> Bill,
>
> thank you for writing up *_our_* discussion of wrt this matter.
>
> +1 on the new API suggestion
>
> +1 to the future expansion, using an SPI approach to extend into support
> SOCKS5 aswell.
>
> Great t
Bill,
thank you for writing up *_our_* discussion of wrt this matter.
+1 on the new API suggestion
+1 to the future expansion, using an SPI approach to extend into support
SOCKS5 aswell.
Great team effort to get this one over the line.
--Udo
On 3/11/20 3:03 PM, Bill Burcham wrote:
In orde
In order to expeditiously address the current need (SNI proxy
configuration) and leave the door open to possible future expansion to
other proxy protocols, possibly via an SPI as Jacob alluded, I'd like to
propose modifying the current RFC as follows:
* eliminate the ProxyType enum
* change the na
