Re: 1xx Clarification

> I believe the argument against a bit-bucket is that the server has to waste
> resources to consume the incoming bits, and network bandwidth gets wasted at a
> time when we're trying to reduce HTTP-induced network bandwidth.  It's hard to
> know how much of a problem either of these *really* is.  Does anyone have
> numbers for how often servers reject PUT/POST because they can't accept the
> content?  My guess is it's not a big problem yet.  Can we afford to defer the
> solution until it is? 
> 
> Dave Kristol

The most frequent case for our implementation at least will, I suspect, 
be when the server has configured different realms for serving and 
submitting a form.  This turns out to be a common situation in an 
embedded system because it saves memory and simplifies interface design; 
the same page is used to display current configuration information and to 
change it, but the authentication required is different.