W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1996

Question re. OPTIONS, ALLOW

From: Ravi Shankar <ravi.shankar@citicorp.com>
Date: Sun Feb 25 23:23:32 1996
Message-Id: <199602260720.AA12647@egate.citicorp.com>
To: HTTP WG maillist <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: ravi.shankar@citicorp.com
Hi

I apologize if I am missing something obvious, or
if this has been discussed previously.

According to the HTTP/1.1 draft spec, proxy servers must
strip unrecognized "Options" and "Public" header fields,
but must pass "Allow" headers unaltered. 

Quoted from Section 8.1 "Options"
> If the OPTIONS request passes 
> through a proxy, the proxy must edit the response to exclude those 
> options known to be unavailable through that proxy.

Quoted from Section 10.5 "Allow"
> A proxy must not modify the Allow header field even if it does not 
> understand all the methods specified, since the user agent may have 
> other means of communicating with the origin server.

Quoted from Section 10.32 "Public"
> If the response passes through a proxy, the proxy must either 
> remove the Public header field or replace it with one applicable to 
> its own capabilities.

Doesnt the other-means-of-communication argument used for Allow
apply to the other two as well?

Though, actually, I think proxies should edit all three headers
to refkect their capability. When using a persistent connection,
it makes a lot of sense to know what are the methods possible
for the current connection. Maybe there should be separate ways for 
finding the Options for the OriginServer, as well as for the conne-
ction.

Regards
Ravi
----------------------------------------------------------------
my_views == my_employers_views ? maybe : but_not_necessarily;

Ravi Shankar
email ravi.shankar@citicorp.com
Received on Sunday, 25 February 1996 23:23:32 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:31:46 EDT