http代理rfc配置_RFC：FeedReaders和MacGyver如何报告博客订阅者-隧道用户代理数据

http代理rfc配置

Sometimes I get ever so slightly depressed that the Web is so fantastically hacked together. The way we revel in AJAX sites but forget how dizzyingly high up we are, floating in layer after layer of abstraction. IP, TCP, HTTP, UTF8/ASCII Text Encoding, HTML, XML, XHTML, CSS, ECMAScript, DOM, the list goes on...there's a lot of moving parts. I wonder how the next generation will learning all the plumbing?

有时，我有时会感到有些沮丧，以至于网络被黑客入侵。 我们陶醉在AJAX网站中的方式，却忘了我们是多么令人眼花high乱，一层又一层地漂浮在抽象层上。 IP，TCP，HTTP，UTF8 / ASCII文本编码，HTML，XML，XHTML，CSS，ECMAScript，DOM，清单不胜枚举...其中有很多活动内容。 我想知道下一代将如何学习所有管道技术？

They can happily drag a button from the Toolbox onto their Form and Start Programming™. I think this means I'm officially old and crusty because I'm finding myself, internally, thinking "these young punks with their Ajax and their MacGyver techniques! Assembling websites with CSS Box Hacks and Paper Clips! Feh!"

他们可以很高兴地将一个按钮从“工具箱”拖动到其“表单并开始编程™”上。 我认为这意味着我正式老迈，因为我在内部发现自己在思考“这些年轻人的朋克以其Ajax和MacGyver的技巧！用CSS Box Hacks和Paper Clips组装网站！真是！”

At any rate, Google Reader, an online feed aggregator whose interface I'm still slightly not digging, is now reporting their subscribers.

无论如何， Google Reader是一个在线供稿聚合器，其界面我仍然略未挖掘，现在正在报告其订阅者。

There's different classes of Feed Readers/Aggregators that can retrieve content two ways. There's, of course, desktop and web readers who can retrieve content directly or centrally. (These are my four classifications.)

Feed阅读器/聚合器有不同的类别，可以通过两种方式检索内容。 当然，台式机和网络阅读器可以直接或集中检索内容。 (这是我的四个分类。)

RSS Bandit and SharpReader and NetNewsWire are actual applications that you install and run locally. They reach out from your computer directly to the feed and download it directly. FeedDemon can do this too, but is a kind of hybrid, in that if you have a NewsGator subscription it's actually getting the feed content from NewsGator, not the publisher, so in that "hybrid" (my word) mode, FeedDemon looks like an online reader.

RSS Bandit和SharpReader和NetNewsWire是您在本地安装和运行的实际应用程序。 他们直接从您的计算机连接到Feed，然后直接下载。 FeedDemon也可以做到这一点，但这是一种混合，因为如果您订阅了NewsGator，则实际上是从NewsGator(而不是发布者)获取Feed内容，因此在这种“混合”(我的话)模式下，FeedDemon看起来像在线阅读器。

Here's a very incomplete, but you'll-get-the-idea-it-is-just-trying-to-make-a-point table:

这是一个非常不完整的方法，但是您会得到一个想法，只是试图提出一个要点表：

Reader	Desktop/Web	Direct/Centralized
Google Reader	Web	Centralized
Bloglines	Web	Centralized
FeedDemon	Desktop	Direct (can talk to NewsGator also)
NewsGator Online	Web	Centralized
SharpReader	Desktop	Direct
RSS Bandit	Desktop	Direct (can talk to NewsGator also)
IE7 (RSS Platform)	Desktop	Direct (but shared and centralized to the OS)

读者	桌面/网页	直接/集中
谷歌读者	网页	集中
博客热线	网页	集中
FeedDemon	桌面	直接 (也可以与NewsGator交谈)
新闻鳄鱼 线上	网页	集中
夏普阅读器	桌面	直接
RSS强盗	桌面	直接 (也可以与NewsGator交谈)
IE7(RSS平台)	桌面	直接 (但共享并 集中到操作系统)

FeedBurner hosts my Feed for this site, and they have a wonderful Feed-specific Special Sauce that figures out, approximately, how many folks are subscribing/reading my site. They use lots of metrics like IP address and what not to figure out Desktop readers, and they have some algorithms to recognize that IPs change and what not.

FeedBurner在此站点托管我的Feed，并且他们有一个很棒的特定于Feed的特殊调料，可以大致计算出有多少人在订阅/阅读我的站点。 他们使用许多指标，例如IP地址和不了解台式机阅读器的内容，并且拥有一些算法来识别IP的变化以及不发生变化。

What's interesting is how these Web and/or Centralized readers reports statistics. When a bot for one of these readers retrieves your feed, they include (or tunnel ala MacGyver), the number of subscribers in their database within the User-Agent like this. (I talked about this some two years ago):

有趣的是这些Web和/或Centraled读者如何报告统计信息。 当这些阅读器之一的漫游器检索到您的供稿时，它们将包括(或tunnel ala MacGyver )，即像这样在User-Agent中其数据库中的订阅者数量。 (两年前我谈到了这个问题)：

• Bloglines/2.0 (http://www.bloglines.com; 32 subscribers)

  Bloglines / 2.0( http：//www.bloglines.com； 32个订阅者)

• NewsGatorOnline/2.0+(http://www.newsgator.com;+250+subscribers)

  NewsGatorOnline / 2.0 +( http：//www.newsgator.com; + 250 + subscribers )

• ThePort_Web/1.0;_subscribers_1

  ThePort_Web / 1.0; _subscribers_1

• LiveJournal.com_(webmaster@livejournal.com;_for_your_url/;_1_readers)

  LiveJournal.com_( webmaster@livejournal.com; _for_your_url /; _ 1_readers )

• Mozilla/5.0+(X11;+U;+Linux+i686;+en-US;+rv:1.2.1;
  +Rojo+1.0;+http://www.rojo.com/corporate/help/agg/;

  Mozilla / 5.0 +(X11; + U; + Linux + i686; + en-US; + rv：1.2.1; + Rojo + 1.0; + http://www.rojo.com/corporate/help/agg/;

  Mozilla/5.0+(X11;+U;+Linux+i686;+en-US;+rv:1.2.1;
  +Rojo+1.0;+http://www.rojo.com/corporate/help/agg/;+Aggregating+on+behalf+of+423+subscriber(s)+
  online+at+http://www.rojo.com/?feed-id=xxx)+Gecko/20021130

  Mozilla / 5.0 +(X11; + U; + Linux + i686; + en-US; + rv：1.2.1; + Rojo + 1.0; + http://www.rojo.com/corporate/help/agg/; +总计+423+个订户+ 在线+ at + http：//www.rojo.com/？feed-id = xxx)+ Gecko / 20021130

Doesn't seem ever so slightly distasteful to you? This data is totally non-standard, and living in the HTTP Headers for User-Agent. Oleg thinks it's OK per the HTTP spec, but I say bleh.

似乎对您来说并不那么令人讨厌吗？ 此数据完全是非标准的，位于User-Agent的HTTP标头中。 Oleg认为按照HTTP规范可以，但是我说bleh 。

Why hunt for older headers to stuff this data into? Four years ago Tim Bray brainstormed some ideas and thought about the URL itself, then the referrer: header, or the from: header. Why not a new one?

为什么要寻找较旧的标头将这些数据填充到其中？ 四年前，蒂姆·布雷(Tim Bray)就该URL本身，然后是Referrer：标头，或from：标头，集思广益。 为什么不新建一个？

HTTP Headers themselves are name/value pairs, fairly well structured, but it seems that rather than forcing FeedBurner to keep tables of the various formats of the various readers and make them Regular Expression their way thought it...

HTTP标头本身是名称/值对，结构相当好，但似乎不是强迫FeedBurner保留各种阅读器的各种格式的表，并使其以正则表达式的方式进行处理……

Old Joke but still a Good One: So you've got a problem, and you've decided to use Regular Expressions to solve it....so, now you've got two problems...

老笑话，但仍然是一个好玩笑：所以您遇到了一个问题，并且您决定使用正则表达式来解决它....所以，现在您遇到了两个问题...

...why not add a new HTTP Header? I mean, the blogosphere has long abandoned many of the slower standards bodies in favor of a de facto standard-building process. If enough people do it, it's standard.

...为什么不添加新的HTTP标头？ 我的意思是，博客圈早就放弃了许多较慢的标准机构，而赞成事实上的标准制定过程。 如果有足够的人这样做，这是标准的。

RFC: Why don't the bots and online aggregators start requesting feeds like this:

RFC：为什么僵尸程序和在线聚合器不开始请求这样的提要：

GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.hanselman.com
User-Agent: MyFeedReadingBotFeed-Subscriber-Count: 45

GET / HTTP / 1.1 主持人：www.hanselman.com 用户代理：MyFeedReadingBot Feed-Subscriber-Count：45

It worked for SOAP Action back in the day, why not standardize a new header now? Let's let MacGyver rest.

以前它对SOAP Action有用，为什么现在不标准化新的标头呢？ 让MacGyver休息一下。

翻译自: https://www.hanselman.com/blog/rfc-how-feedreaders-and-macgyver-report-blog-subscribers-tunneled-useragent-data

http代理rfc配置