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

Re: 505 HTTP Version Not Supported

From: Bob Jernigan <jern@spaceaix.jhuapl.edu>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 15:35:06 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <9604032035.AA20818@sdrmis.jhuapl.edu>
To: Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, ddubois@spyglass.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/177
Paul Leach wrote:
> >----------
> >From: 	Daniel DuBois[SMTP:ddubois@spyglass.com]
> >Subject: 	Re: 505 HTTP Version Not Supported
> >
> >At 01:42 PM 4/3/96 -0500, Bob Jernigan wrote:
> >>I.e., "if I don't need it, no-one does."
> >
> >I don't think it's a matter of me shrugging off the little people. 
> >We've
> >been moving a long time towards increased HTTP complexity.  We're now
> >at the
> >point where to be compliant with the latest HTTP there are headers you
> >are
> >*required* to send.  The issue of how  virtual servers are supposed to
> >handle 0.9 requests can be a sticky one (as long as 1.0 and 0.9 are
> >around
> >will vendors continue to suck up multiple IP addresses for one
> >machine?).
> >
> >IMO, this pseudo-backward compatibilty can only remain feasible for so
> >long.
> >I just think the world (wide web) would be a better place if no one
> >made 0.9
> >requests anymore.  And I'll probably feel the same way about 1.0
> >requests
> >soon enough.
> >
> >>But 0.9 is useful and will continue
> >>to be useful in certain circumstances.  About half my hits are 0.9 but
> >>they do return <1% of the data.  It all depends on what you think http
> >>is useful for.
> <soapbox>
> I think Dan is being too kind. My reading of how people in charge of big
> chunks of the Interent backbone feel is that if we don't expunge 0.9
> _and_ 1.0 ASAP then the whole net will collapse. So, while it may be
> convenient to not have to change, and the old way may deliver value to
> those using it, they are creating disvalue for everyone else.
> The minimum pieces of 1.1 that have to be implemented by clients and
> servers to "save the Internet" aren't that hard: send Host:, and use
> persistent connections. (Proxy caches have additional requirements.) The
> people who have "20 line HTTP clients and 200 line HTTP servers" in PERL
> might see their code grow by 20 lines in order to do this. Real clients
> and servers might add 100-1000 lines (mostly for persistent
> connections).  In return, the Internet will be there for us all to use.
> </soapbox>
> Paul
Then perhaps it's time to be explicit about retiring 0.9.  I find
it useful in my intranet environment but I see no reason this
should burden the Internet.  We could say that "If you use 0.9 in
an Intranet environment, then this environment should be shielded
from the Internet."  I can't believe I'm the only one still using
0.9, but if so, I'll happily withdraw any request to preserve 0.9
and stuff them in a tiny server behind my firewall and drop any
claim about HTTP.  The same thing might apply to anyone who wants
to stay with HTTP/1.0.  

Received on Wednesday, 3 April 1996 12:41:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:16 UTC