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

Re: NEW ISSUE: message-body in CONNECT response

From: Robert Siemer <Robert.Siemer-httpwg@backsla.sh>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:20:45 +0100
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20071128232045.GE1872@polar.elf12.net>

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 04:17:54AM +0100, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * Robert Siemer wrote:
> >As of RFC2616 a 200 does not mean the response is going to have a 
> >body, so why enforce that for CONNECT? The proxy has to be aware of that 
> >method anyway for it to work.
> 
> It is not possible, under RFC 2616, for a 200 response to have no body,
> unless it is a response to a HEAD request (see the last part of 4.3).
> You can only have a zero-length body and need to indicate that using
> Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding.

4.3. Message Body

   The message-body (if any) ...

   [three other paragraphs]

   For response messages, whether or not a message-body is included with
   a message is dependent on both the request method and the response
   status code (Section 6.1.1).  All responses to the HEAD request
   method MUST NOT include a message-body, ... All 1xx (informational),
   204 (no content), and 304 (not modified) responses MUST NOT include
   a message-body.  All other responses do include a message-body, ...




I read the last sentence as "all other respones - defined in this spec - do 
include a message-body..." Otherwise I wouldn't call the presence of a 
message-body beeing "dependent on both the request method and the response 
status code". In that case it would be better to say that it depends only on 
the status code and HEAD being the body-less GET exception.

Especially if the spec aims to include general "unknown method, what to do" 
information.



Robert
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2007 23:20:17 GMT

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