W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1997

Re: Is 100-Continue hop-by-hop?

From: David W. Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 22:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Cc: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.3.96.970709223730.26041B-100000@shell1.aimnet.com>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3714


On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Jeffrey Mogul wrote:

> ought to add something like:
> 
>    A response message with this status code MUST be forwarded by
>    a proxy, unless the connection between the proxy and its client
>    has been closed.

Adding:
                      OR the Expected: header and 100 Continue
     sequence was initiated by the proxy.

If we still have the notion that the 100Continue mechanism might be
hop-hop and initiated by an intermediate proxy.

Dave Morris
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 1997 22:45:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:20 UTC