Nit on CONNECT tunnel forwarding

[tfpauly]

The current section on CONNECT (7.3.6) in the semantics document refers to the proxy forwarding packets:

The CONNECT method requests that the recipient establish a tunnel to the destination 
origin server identified by the request-target and, if successful, thereafter restrict its 
behavior to blind forwarding of packets, in both directions, until the tunnel is closed.

Since the proxy terminates TCP, there is no forwarding of IP packets, but rather the contents of the TCP streams.

[wtarreau]

Well spotted! I'd even suggest "to blindly forward bytes in both directions ...". Too often I see people who imagine that packet delimitation is respected on both sides of a proxy and I have to tell them that it's just a uninterrupted stream of bytes that each layer decides to delimit wherever it wants.

[LPardue]

I'd say that 7231 is self-consistent with the use of packet in 7230. If a change is needed, we should change wording consistently. Or, was this issue raised on the WIP core doc?

[tfpauly]

@LPardue this issue is being raised on the WIP core doc. The same text does also exist in 7231, but I consider them to both be in error. While we're updating the text for the core doc, let's fix the text to be clearer.

[LPardue]

Thanks for the clarification @tfpauly, that sounds good to me.

[LPardue]

Fwiw, the HiNT draft uses the terminology: blind forwarding of IP payloads, UDP datagram payloads and TCP/IP packet payload.

[MikeBishop]

HTTP/3 says:

All DATA frames on the stream correspond to data sent or received on the TCP
connection. Any DATA frame sent by the client is transmitted by the proxy to the
TCP server; data received from the TCP server is packaged into DATA frames by
the proxy. Note that the size and number of TCP segments is not guaranteed to
map predictably to the size and number of HTTP DATA or QUIC STREAM frames.

[tfpauly]

@MikeBishop that text looks good. Something along those lines, but that also works for HTTP/1.1, would be right for this core doc text.

[reschke]

Maybe just replace "packets" with "data"?

[wtarreau]

So as mentioned above in #327, while having a look at the latest draft I was struck again by this "packets" there, and even forgot about this old issue. Pinging again. I suggest that we change "forwarding of packets" with "forwarding of the byte stream" so that we can close these issues.