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

Re: NEW ISSUE: repeating non-list-type-headers

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:54:12 +0100
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1195595652.6219.28.camel@henriknordstrom.net>
On tis, 2007-11-20 at 17:16 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote:

> That's all true, but it doesn't answer the question of what a recipient 
> should do with something like:
> 
>     Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
>     Content-Type: text/plain
> 
> (see <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0271.html>).
> 
> ...or even worse, with conflicting Content-Length headers....

Reject it, ignore the header, or try to make the best out of it. It's up
to the implementer omho. Implementation detail on how to behave when
seeing things outside specifications. My preferred action when seeing
things violating a MUST NOT is to reject the message as invalid unless
specs says otherwise, but current specs sometimes promote ignoring
instead.. (i.e. Content-Length together with chunked encoding). Very
many implementations picks one (first or last) of the available
alternatives.

For security reasons Content-Length requires special attention as it
also transport related, and there the sane thing is to reject the
message, or if that's not possible for whatever reason then use the
biggest one or act as if Content-Length was not given..

I don't really see it as a problem except for content-length.

Regards
Henrik

Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 21:54:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:23 GMT