3 ms·
A different position would be to simply let these misconfigured and badly written networking programs fail - and let them fail hard. Yes, it will be painful in
by Udo 12y ago
A different position would be to simply let these misconfigured and badly written networking programs fail - and let them fail hard.
Yes, it will be painful in the short term and users will notice outages, but in the long run it will result in these issues being fixed. If we continue a policy of reversion to bad workarounds (which is really what JSONP is), we not only add complexity and the potential for obscure exploits to our own software, we ensure that nobody at Cisco et al will ever feel the pressure to fix these bugs.
- gress 12y agoSacrificing a business and the livelihoods of it's employees is a steep price to pay for getting some bugs fixed.
- Udo 12y agoI depends on the position you're in. If you're a scrappy B2B startup looking to gain traction, this is indeed not a battle you want to fight. But things look vastly different if you're Facebook or Techcrunch. Then the story suddenly becomes "there is a bug in our router that causes TC not to load, this needs to be fixed ASAP" instead of "screw this app, it doesn't seem work".
- gress 12y agoAlgolia looks pretty scrappy to me.
- Udo 12y agoI get that you disagree, but that's just a glib answer. I thought we were discussing the general case, not brainstorming for Algolia specifically.
- gress 12y agoTrue. I was mostly responding to the tone of the original comment. By all means encourage powerful sites to deprecate support for poor implementations as a way of encouraging progress.
- jlemoine 12y agoI am agree that JSONP is a bad workaround, but it is not an option to do nothing. The problem is that we have large-audience websites as customers, even with a patch from Cisco you cannot force all people to update their firewall, especially because there is no automatic software upgrade on this VPN.