<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.17 (Ruby 2.6.4) -->
<?rfc-ext html-pretty-print="prettyprint https://cdn.rawgit.com/google/code-prettify/master/loader/run_prettify.js"?>
<rfc xmlns:x="http://purl.org/net/xml2rfc/ext"
      category="std"
      consensus="true"
      docName="draft-ietf-httpbis-connect-tcp-03"
      ipr="trust200902"
      sortRefs="true"
      submissionType="IETF"
      symRefs="true"
      tocInclude="true">
   <x:feedback template="mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org?subject={docname},%20%22{section}%22\&amp;amp;body=%3c{ref}%3e:"/>
   <front>
      <title abbrev="Templated CONNECT-TCP">Template-Driven HTTP CONNECT Proxying for TCP</title>
      <author fullname="Benjamin M. Schwartz" initials="B. M." surname="Schwartz">
         <organization>Meta Platforms, Inc.</organization>
         <address>
            <email>ietf@bemasc.net</email>
         </address>
      </author>
      <date day="01" month="July" year="2024"/>
      <area>art</area>
      <workgroup>httpbis</workgroup>
      <keyword>Internet-Draft</keyword>
      <abstract><?line 35?>
         <t>TCP proxying using HTTP CONNECT has long been part of the core HTTP specification. However, this proxying functionality has several important deficiencies in modern HTTP environments. This specification defines an alternative HTTP proxy service configuration for TCP connections. This configuration is described by a URI Template, similar to the CONNECT-UDP and CONNECT-IP protocols.</t>
      </abstract>
   </front>
   <middle><?line 39?>
      <section anchor="introduction">
         <name>Introduction</name>
         <section anchor="history">
            <name>History</name>
            <t>HTTP has used the CONNECT method for proxying TCP connections since HTTP/1.1. When using CONNECT, the request target specifies a host and port number, and the proxy forwards TCP payloads between the client and this destination (<xref section="9.3.6" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>). To date, this is the only mechanism defined for proxying TCP over HTTP. In this specification, this is referred to as a "classic HTTP CONNECT proxy".</t>
            <t>HTTP/3 uses a UDP transport, so it cannot be forwarded using the pre-existing CONNECT mechanism. To enable forward proxying of HTTP/3, the MASQUE effort has defined proxy mechanisms that are capable of proxying UDP datagrams <xref target="CONNECT-UDP"/>, and more generally IP datagrams <xref target="CONNECT-IP"/>. The destination host and port number (if applicable) are encoded into the HTTP resource path, and end-to-end datagrams are wrapped into HTTP Datagrams <xref target="RFC9297"/> on the client-proxy path.</t>
         </section>
         <section anchor="problems">
            <name>Problems</name>
            <t>HTTP clients can be configured to use proxies by selecting a proxy hostname, a port, and whether to use a security protocol. However, CONNECT requests using the proxy do not carry this configuration information. Instead, they only indicate the hostname and port of the target. This prevents any HTTP server from hosting multiple distinct proxy services, as the server cannot distinguish them by path (as with distinct resources) or by origin (as in "virtual hosting").</t>
            <t>The absence of an explicit origin for the proxy also rules out the usual defenses against server port misdirection attacks (see <xref section="7.4" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9110"/>) and creates ambiguity about the use of origin-scoped response header fields (e.g., "Alt-Svc" <xref target="RFC7838"/>, "Strict-Transport-Security" <xref target="RFC6797"/>).</t>
            <t>Classic HTTP CONNECT proxies can be used to reach a target host that is specified as a domain name or an IP address. However, because only a single target host can be specified, proxy-driven Happy Eyeballs and cross-IP fallback can only be used when the host is a domain name. For IP-targeted requests to succeed, the client must know which address families are supported by the proxy via some out-of-band mechanism, or open multiple independent CONNECT requests and abandon any that prove unnecessary.</t>
         </section>
         <section anchor="overview">
            <name>Overview</name>
            <t>This specification describes an alternative mechanism for proxying TCP in HTTP. Like <xref target="CONNECT-UDP"/> and <xref target="CONNECT-IP"/>, the proxy service is identified by a URI Template. Proxy interactions reuse standard HTTP components and semantics, avoiding changes to the core HTTP protocol.</t>
         </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="conventions-and-definitions">
         <name>Conventions and Definitions</name>
         <t>The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/>
            <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>
         <?line -18?>
      </section>
      <section anchor="specification">
         <name>Specification</name>
         <t>A template-driven TCP transport proxy for HTTP is identified by a URI Template <xref target="RFC6570"/> containing variables named "target_host" and "tcp_port". The client substitutes the destination host and port number into these variables to produce the request URI.</t>
         <t>The "target_host" variable <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be a domain name, an IP address literal, or a list of IP addresses. The "tcp_port" variable <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be a single integer. If "target_host" is a list (as in <xref section="3.2.1" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC6570"/>), the server <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> perform the same connection procedure as if these IP addresses had been returned in response to A and AAAA queries for a domain name.</t>
         <section anchor="in-http11">
            <name>In HTTP/1.1</name>
            <t>In HTTP/1.1, the client uses the proxy by issuing a request as follows:</t>
            <t>
               <list style="symbols">
                  <t>The method <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> be "GET".</t>
                  <t>The request <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> include a single "Host" header field containing the origin of the proxy.</t>
                  <t>The request <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> include a "Connection" header field with the value "Upgrade". (Note that this requirement is case-insensitive as per <xref section="7.6.1" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9110"/>.)</t>
                  <t>The request <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> include an "Upgrade" header field with the value "connect-tcp".</t>
                  <t>The request's target <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> correspond to the URI derived from expansion of the proxy's URI Template.</t>
               </list>
            </t>
            <t>If the request is well-formed and permissible, the proxy <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> attempt the TCP connection before sending any response status code other than "100 (Continue)" (see <xref target="conveying-metadata"/>). If the TCP connection is successful, the response <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> be as follows:</t>
            <t>
               <list style="symbols">
                  <t>The HTTP status code <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> be "101 (Switching Protocols)".</t>
                  <t>The response <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> include a "Connection" header field with the value "Upgrade".</t>
                  <t>The response <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> include a single "Upgrade" header field with the value "connect-tcp".</t>
               </list>
            </t>
            <t>If the request is malformed or impermissible, the proxy <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> return a 4XX error code. If a TCP connection was not established, the proxy <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> switch protocols to "connect-tcp", and the client <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> reuse this connection for additional HTTP requests.</t>
            <t>After a success response is returned, the connection <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> conform to all the usual requirements for classic CONNECT proxies in HTTP/1.1 (<xref section="9.3.6" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>). Additionally, if the proxy observes a connection error from the client (e.g., a TCP RST, TCP timeout, or TLS error), it <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> send a TCP RST to the target. If the proxy observes a connection error from the target, it <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> send a TLS "internal_error" alert to the client, or set the TCP RST bit if TLS is not in use. These behaviors avoid truncation of transfers between the client and the target on vulnerable protocols (e.g., HTTP/1.1 without TLS) while preserving the confidentiality and integrity guarantees of the "https" scheme.</t>
            <figure title="Templated TCP proxy example in HTTP/1.1">
               <artwork>
Client                                                 Proxy

GET /proxy?target_host=192.0.2.1&amp;tcp_port=443 HTTP/1.1
Host: example.com
Connection: Upgrade
Upgrade: connect-tcp

** Proxy establishes a TCP connection to 192.0.2.1:443 **

                            HTTP/1.1 101 Switching Protocols
                            Connection: Upgrade
                            Upgrade: connect-tcp
</artwork>
            </figure>
         </section>
         <section anchor="in-http2-and-http3">
            <name>In HTTP/2 and HTTP/3</name>
            <t>In HTTP/2 and HTTP/3, the proxy <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> include SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL in its SETTINGS frame <xref target="RFC8441"/>
               <xref target="RFC9220"/>. The client uses the proxy by issuing an "extended CONNECT" request as follows:</t>
            <t>
               <list style="symbols">
                  <t>The :method pseudo-header field <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> be "CONNECT".</t>
                  <t>The :protocol pseudo-header field <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> be "connect-tcp".</t>
                  <t>The :authority pseudo-header field <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> contain the authority of the proxy.</t>
                  <t>The :path and :scheme pseudo-header fields <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> contain the path and scheme of the request URI derived from the proxy's URI Template.</t>
               </list>
            </t>
            <t>From this point on, the request and response <bcp14>SHALL</bcp14> conform to all the usual requirements for classic CONNECT proxies in this HTTP version (see <xref section="8.5" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9113"/> and <xref section="4.4" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9114"/>).</t>
            <t>A templated TCP proxying request that does not conform to all of these requirements represents a client error (see <xref section="15.5" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>) and may be malformed (see <xref section="8.1.1" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9113"/> and <xref section="4.1.2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9114"/>).</t>
            <figure title="Templated TCP proxy example in HTTP/2">
               <artwork>
HEADERS
:method = CONNECT
:scheme = https
:authority = request-proxy.example
:path = /proxy?target_host=192.0.2.1,2001:db8::1&amp;tcp_port=443
:protocol = connect-tcp
...
</artwork>
            </figure>
         </section>
         <section anchor="use-of-relevant-headers">
            <name>Use of Relevant Headers</name>
            <section anchor="origin-scoped-headers">
               <name>Origin-scoped Headers</name>
               <t>Ordinary HTTP headers apply only to the single resource identified in the request or response. An origin-scoped HTTP header is a special response header that is intended to change the client's behavior for subsequent requests to any resource on this origin.</t>
               <t>Unlike classic HTTP CONNECT proxies, a templated TCP proxy has an unambiguous origin of its own. Origin-scoped headers apply to this origin when they are associated with a templated TCP proxy response. Here are some origin-scoped headers that could potentially be sent by a templated TCP proxy:</t>
               <t>
                  <list style="symbols">
                     <t>"Alt-Svc" <xref target="RFC7838"/>
                     </t>
                     <t>"Strict-Transport-Security" <xref target="RFC6797"/>
                     </t>
                     <t>"Public-Key-Pins" <xref target="RFC7469"/>
                     </t>
                     <t>"Accept-CH" <xref target="RFC8942"/>
                     </t>
                     <t>"Set-Cookie" <xref target="RFC6265"/>, which has configurable scope.</t>
                     <t>"Clear-Site-Data" <xref target="CLEAR-SITE-DATA"/>
                     </t>
                  </list>
               </t>
            </section>
            <section anchor="authentication-headers">
               <name>Authentication Headers</name>
               <t>Authentication to a templated TCP proxy normally uses ordinary HTTP authentication via the "401 (Unauthorized)" response code, the "WWW-Authenticate" response header field, and the "Authorization" request header field (<xref section="11.6" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>). A templated TCP proxy does not use the "407 (Proxy Authentication Required)" response code and related header fields (<xref section="11.7" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>) because they do not traverse HTTP gateways (see <xref target="operational-considerations"/>).</t>
               <t>Clients <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> assume that all proxy resources generated by a single template share a protection space (i.e., a realm) (<xref section="11.5" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>). For many authentication schemes, this will allow the client to avoid waiting for a "401 (Unauthorized)" response before each new connection through the proxy.</t>
            </section>
         </section>
         <section anchor="relationship-to-the-capsule-protocol">
            <name>Relationship to the Capsule Protocol</name>
            <t>Unlike the datagram-oriented templated HTTP proxying specifications <xref target="CONNECT-UDP"/>
               <xref target="CONNECT-IP"/>, this specification does not make use of the Capsule Protocol <xref target="RFC9297"/>. A future specification could define a procedure for performing TCP proxying using the Capsule Protocol, but no such procedure is defined here.</t>
            <t>When implementing this specification, clients and servers <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> send a "Capsule-Protocol: ?1" header field.</t>
         </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="additional-connection-setup-behaviors">
         <name>Additional Connection Setup Behaviors</name>
         <t>This section discusses some behaviors that are permitted or recommended in order to enhance the performance or functionality of connection setup.</t>
         <section anchor="latency-optimizations">
            <name>Latency optimizations</name>
            <t>When using this specification in HTTP/2 or HTTP/3, clients <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> start sending TCP stream content optimistically, subject to flow control limits (<xref section="5.2" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9113"/> or <xref section="4.1" sectionFormat="of" target="RFC9000"/>). Proxies <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> buffer this "optimistic" content until the TCP stream becomes writable, and discard it if the TCP connection fails. (Clients <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> use "optimistic" behavior in HTTP/1.1, as this would interfere with reuse of the connection after an error response such as "401 (Unauthorized)".)</t>
            <t>Servers that host a proxy under this specification <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> offer support for TLS early data in accordance with <xref target="RFC8470"/>. Clients <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> send "connect-tcp" requests in early data, and <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> include "optimistic" TCP content in early data (in HTTP/2 and HTTP/3). At the TLS layer, proxies <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> ignore, reject, or accept the <spanx style="verb">early_data</spanx> extension (<xref section="4.2.10" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8446"/>). At the HTTP layer, proxies <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> process the request immediately, return a "425 (Too Early)" response (<xref section="5.2" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8470"/>), or delay some or all processing of the request until the handshake completes. For example, a proxy with limited anti-replay defenses might choose to perform DNS resolution of the <spanx style="verb">target_host</spanx> when a request arrives in early data, but delay the TCP connection until the TLS handshake completes.</t>
         </section>
         <section anchor="conveying-metadata">
            <name>Conveying metadata</name>
            <t>This specification supports the "Expect: 100-continue" request header (<xref section="10.1.1" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>) in any HTTP version. The "100 (Continue)" status code confirms receipt of a request at the proxy without waiting for the proxy-destination TCP handshake to succeed or fail. This might be particularly helpful when the destination host is not responding, as TCP handshakes can hang for several minutes before failing. Clients <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> send "Expect: 100-continue", and proxies <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> respect it by returning "100 (Continue)" if the request is not immediately rejected.</t>
            <t>Proxies implementing this specification <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> include a "Proxy-Status" response header <xref target="RFC9209"/> in any success or failure response (i.e., status codes 101, 2XX, 4XX, or 5XX) to support advanced client behaviors and diagnostics. In HTTP/2 or HTTP/3, proxies <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> additionally send a "Proxy-Status" trailer in the event of an unclean shutdown.</t>
         </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="applicability">
         <name>Applicability</name>
         <section anchor="servers">
            <name>Servers</name>
            <t>For server operators, template-driven TCP proxies are particularly valuable in situations where virtual-hosting is needed, or where multiple proxies must share an origin. For example, the proxy might benefit from sharing an HTTP gateway that provides DDoS defense, performs request sanitization, or enforces user authorization.</t>
            <t>The URI template can also be structured to generate high-entropy Capability URLs <xref target="CAPABILITY"/>, so that only authorized users can discover the proxy service.</t>
         </section>
         <section anchor="clients">
            <name>Clients</name>
            <t>Clients that support both classic HTTP CONNECT proxies and template-driven TCP proxies <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> accept both types via a single configuration string. If the configuration string can be parsed as a URI Template containing the required variables, it is a template-driven TCP proxy. Otherwise, it is presumed to represent a classic HTTP CONNECT proxy.</t>
            <t>In some cases, it is valuable to allow "connect-tcp" clients to reach "connect-tcp"-only proxies when using a legacy configuration method that cannot convey a URI template. To support this arrangement, clients <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> treat certain errors during classic HTTP CONNECT as indications that the proxy might only support "connect-tcp":</t>
            <t>
               <list style="symbols">
                  <t>In HTTP/1.1: the response status code is "426 (Upgrade Required)", with an "Upgrade: connect-tcp" response header.</t>
                  <t>In any HTTP version: the response status code is "501 (Not Implemented)". <list style="symbols">
                        <t>Requires SETTINGS_ENABLE_CONNECT_PROTOCOL to have been negotiated in HTTP/2 or HTTP/3.</t>
                     </list>
                  </t>
               </list>
            </t>
            <t>If the client infers that classic HTTP CONNECT is not supported, it <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> retry the request using the registered default template for "connect-tcp":</t>
            <figure title="Registered default template">
               <artwork>
https://$PROXY_HOST:$PROXY_PORT/.well-known/masque
                    /tcp/{target_host}/{tcp_port}/
</artwork>
            </figure>
            <t>If this request succeeds, the client <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> record a preference for "connect-tcp" to avoid further retry delays.</t>
         </section>
         <section anchor="multi-purpose-proxies">
            <name>Multi-purpose proxies</name>
            <t>The names of the variables in the URI Template uniquely identify the capabilities of the proxy. Undefined variables are permitted in URI Templates, so a single template can be used for multiple purposes.</t>
            <t>Multipurpose templates can be useful when a single client may benefit from access to multiple complementary services (e.g., TCP and UDP), or when the proxy is used by a variety of clients with different needs.</t>
            <figure title="Example multipurpose template for a combined TCP, UDP, and IP proxy and DoH server">
               <artwork>
https://proxy.example/{?target_host,tcp_port,target_port,
                        target,ipproto,dns}
</artwork>
            </figure>
         </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="security-considerations">
         <name>Security Considerations</name>
         <t>Template-driven TCP proxying is largely subject to the same security risks as classic HTTP CONNECT. For example, any restrictions on authorized use of the proxy (see <xref section="9.3.6" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC9110"/>) apply equally to both.</t>
         <t>A small additional risk is posed by the use of a URI Template parser on the client side. The template input string could be crafted to exploit any vulnerabilities in the parser implementation. Client implementers should apply their usual precautions for code that processes untrusted inputs.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="operational-considerations">
         <name>Operational Considerations</name>
         <t>Templated TCP proxies can make use of standard HTTP gateways and path-routing to ease implementation and allow use of shared infrastructure. However, current gateways might need modifications to support TCP proxy services. To be compatible, a gateway must:</t>
         <t>
            <list style="symbols">
               <t>support Extended CONNECT (if acting as an HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 server).</t>
               <t>support HTTP/1.1 Upgrade to "connect-tcp" (if acting as an HTTP/1.1 server) <list style="symbols">
                     <t>only after forwarding the upgrade request to the origin and observing a success response.</t>
                  </list>
               </t>
               <t>forward the "connect-tcp" protocol to the origin.</t>
               <t>convert "connect-tcp" requests between all supported HTTP server and client versions.</t>
               <t>allow any "Proxy-Status" headers to traverse the gateway.</t>
            </list>
         </t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="iana-considerations">
         <name>IANA Considerations</name>
         <section anchor="new-upgrade-token">
            <name>New Upgrade Token</name>
            <t>IF APPROVED, IANA is requested to add the following entry to the HTTP Upgrade Token Registry:</t>
            <t>
               <list style="symbols">
                  <t>Value: "connect-tcp"</t>
                  <t>Description: Proxying of TCP payloads</t>
                  <t>Reference: (This document)</t>
               </list>
            </t>
         </section>
         <section anchor="iana-template">
            <name>New MASQUE Default Template</name>
            <t>IF APPROVED, IANA is requested to add the following entry to the "MASQUE URI Suffixes" registry:</t>
            <texttable>
               <ttcol align="left">Path Segment</ttcol>
               <ttcol align="left">Description</ttcol>
               <ttcol align="left">Reference</ttcol>
               <c>tcp</c>
               <c>TCP Proxying</c>
               <c>(This document)</c>
            </texttable>
         </section>
      </section>
   </middle>
   <back>
      <references anchor="sec-normative-references" title="Normative References">
         <reference anchor="RFC9110">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP Semantics</title>
               <author fullname="R. Fielding"
                        initials="R."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Fielding"/>
               <author fullname="M. Nottingham"
                        initials="M."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Nottingham"/>
               <author fullname="J. Reschke"
                        initials="J."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Reschke"/>
               <date month="June" year="2022"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="STD" value="97"/>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9110"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9110"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC2119">
            <front>
               <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
               <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner"/>
               <date month="March" year="1997"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC8174">
            <front>
               <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
               <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
               <date month="May" year="2017"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC6570">
            <front>
               <title>URI Template</title>
               <author fullname="J. Gregorio" initials="J." surname="Gregorio"/>
               <author fullname="R. Fielding" initials="R." surname="Fielding"/>
               <author fullname="M. Hadley" initials="M." surname="Hadley"/>
               <author fullname="M. Nottingham" initials="M." surname="Nottingham"/>
               <author fullname="D. Orchard" initials="D." surname="Orchard"/>
               <date month="March" year="2012"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6570"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6570"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC8441">
            <front>
               <title>Bootstrapping WebSockets with HTTP/2</title>
               <author fullname="P. McManus" initials="P." surname="McManus"/>
               <date month="September" year="2018"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8441"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8441"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC9220">
            <front>
               <title>Bootstrapping WebSockets with HTTP/3</title>
               <author fullname="R. Hamilton" initials="R." surname="Hamilton"/>
               <date month="June" year="2022"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9220"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9220"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC9113">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP/2</title>
               <author fullname="M. Thomson"
                        initials="M."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Thomson"/>
               <author fullname="C. Benfield"
                        initials="C."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Benfield"/>
               <date month="June" year="2022"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9113"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9113"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC9114">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP/3</title>
               <author fullname="M. Bishop"
                        initials="M."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Bishop"/>
               <date month="June" year="2022"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9114"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9114"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC9000">
            <front>
               <title>QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport</title>
               <author fullname="J. Iyengar"
                        initials="J."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Iyengar"/>
               <author fullname="M. Thomson"
                        initials="M."
                        role="editor"
                        surname="Thomson"/>
               <date month="May" year="2021"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9000"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9000"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC8470">
            <front>
               <title>Using Early Data in HTTP</title>
               <author fullname="M. Thomson" initials="M." surname="Thomson"/>
               <author fullname="M. Nottingham" initials="M." surname="Nottingham"/>
               <author fullname="W. Tarreau" initials="W." surname="Tarreau"/>
               <date month="September" year="2018"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8470"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8470"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC8446">
            <front>
               <title>The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3</title>
               <author fullname="E. Rescorla" initials="E." surname="Rescorla"/>
               <date month="August" year="2018"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8446"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8446"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC9209">
            <front>
               <title>The Proxy-Status HTTP Response Header Field</title>
               <author fullname="M. Nottingham" initials="M." surname="Nottingham"/>
               <author fullname="P. Sikora" initials="P." surname="Sikora"/>
               <date month="June" year="2022"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9209"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9209"/>
         </reference>
      </references>
      <references anchor="sec-informative-references" title="Informative References">
         <reference anchor="CAPABILITY" target="https://www.w3.org/TR/capability-urls/">
            <front>
               <title>Good Practices for Capability URLs</title>
               <author/>
               <date month="February" year="2014"/>
            </front>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="CLEAR-SITE-DATA"
                     target="https://www.w3.org/TR/clear-site-data/">
            <front>
               <title>Clear Site Data</title>
               <author/>
               <date month="November" year="2017"/>
            </front>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="CONNECT-UDP">
            <front>
               <title>Proxying UDP in HTTP</title>
               <author fullname="D. Schinazi" initials="D." surname="Schinazi"/>
               <date month="August" year="2022"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9298"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9298"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="CONNECT-IP">
            <front>
               <title>Proxying IP in HTTP</title>
               <author fullname="T. Pauly" initials="T." role="editor" surname="Pauly"/>
               <author fullname="D. Schinazi" initials="D." surname="Schinazi"/>
               <author fullname="A. Chernyakhovsky" initials="A." surname="Chernyakhovsky"/>
               <author fullname="M. Kühlewind" initials="M." surname="Kühlewind"/>
               <author fullname="M. Westerlund" initials="M." surname="Westerlund"/>
               <date month="October" year="2023"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9484"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9484"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC9297">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP Datagrams and the Capsule Protocol</title>
               <author fullname="D. Schinazi" initials="D." surname="Schinazi"/>
               <author fullname="L. Pardue" initials="L." surname="Pardue"/>
               <date month="August" year="2022"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9297"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC9297"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC7838">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP Alternative Services</title>
               <author fullname="M. Nottingham" initials="M." surname="Nottingham"/>
               <author fullname="P. McManus" initials="P." surname="McManus"/>
               <author fullname="J. Reschke" initials="J." surname="Reschke"/>
               <date month="April" year="2016"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7838"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7838"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC6797">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS)</title>
               <author fullname="J. Hodges" initials="J." surname="Hodges"/>
               <author fullname="C. Jackson" initials="C." surname="Jackson"/>
               <author fullname="A. Barth" initials="A." surname="Barth"/>
               <date month="November" year="2012"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6797"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6797"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC7469">
            <front>
               <title>Public Key Pinning Extension for HTTP</title>
               <author fullname="C. Evans" initials="C." surname="Evans"/>
               <author fullname="C. Palmer" initials="C." surname="Palmer"/>
               <author fullname="R. Sleevi" initials="R." surname="Sleevi"/>
               <date month="April" year="2015"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7469"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7469"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC8942">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP Client Hints</title>
               <author fullname="I. Grigorik" initials="I." surname="Grigorik"/>
               <author fullname="Y. Weiss" initials="Y." surname="Weiss"/>
               <date month="February" year="2021"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8942"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8942"/>
         </reference>
         <reference anchor="RFC6265">
            <front>
               <title>HTTP State Management Mechanism</title>
               <author fullname="A. Barth" initials="A." surname="Barth"/>
               <date month="April" year="2011"/>
            </front>
            <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6265"/>
            <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6265"/>
         </reference>
      </references>
      <?line 267?>
      <section anchor="acknowledgments" numbered="false">
         <name>Acknowledgments</name>
         <t>Thanks to Amos Jeffries, Tommy Pauly, Kyle Nekritz, David Schinazi, and Kazuho Oku for close review and suggested changes.</t>
      </section>
   </back>
</rfc>
