W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-decroy-http-progress-00.txt]

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 04:14:29 +0100
To: Jeffrey Mogul <Jeff.Mogul@hp.com>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1171509269.18603.38.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
ons 2007-02-14 klockan 17:12 -0800 skrev Jeffrey Mogul:

> Also: this thread has touched briefly on how proxies should
> deal with HTTP version numbers.  Please see RFC2145 -
> "Use and Interpretation of HTTP Version Numbers."  It's not
> just a good idea, it's the law.

If this based is my comment earlier in this thread then it was not about
how to deal with HTTP version numbers but how to determine the HTTP
version level of the complete request path, and what RFC 2616 really
means with "unless the server is known to be HTTP/1.1 compliant" when
there is proxies involved..

Knowing and understanding the HTTP version level of a next-hop server is
possible and reasonable in most cases, but reliably knowing what HTTP
version levels will be used in the complete request path when making a
request is non-trivial when there is multiple levels of proxies involved
or non-conforming proxies not adding Via headers.


Received on Thursday, 15 February 2007 03:14:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:41 UTC