W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: PATCH thoughts...

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 14:44:05 -0700
Message-Id: <80C98A01-9AEF-11D8-8BCF-000A95B2BB72@osafoundation.org>
Cc: HTTP working group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Justin Chapweske <justin@chapweske.com>, Jeffrey Mogul <Jeff.Mogul@hp.com>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>

Sure, it's a big fat bug.  Just saying that I'm not the only one who 
assumed
that every HTTP message with a body had a Content-Type.

lisa

On Apr 30, 2004, at 2:39 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:

> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> I know of server implementations that do not expect to see a message
>> body if the Content-Type header is missing and they interpret the
>> body, if sent, as the next request.
>
> That's a big fat bug.  They should check the Transfer-Encoding and
> Content-Length headers: if either exist, there's a body.
> Transfer-Encoding has precedence.  If neither exist, there's a body if
> Content-Type is multipart/byteranges.
>
> See "4.4 Message Length" in RFC2616.
>
> -- Jamie
Received on Friday, 30 April 2004 17:44:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:30 GMT