W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: Issues addressed in the -10 and -11 drafts

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:31:14 +1000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <B6D7C25D-5EA0-4C98-9DCB-2C483A26F20C@mnot.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>

On 02/09/2010, at 4:00 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:

>> 
>> #95 - Handling multiple Content-Length headers (-11)
> 
> I reported a few cases of duplicated content-lengths I already observed
> and the fact that I decided to only allow multiple content-lengths if
> they are all exactly the same.

How common is this in your experience? 


> You said that for this specific case this
> was probably acceptable. Do you think relaxing the rule for this specific
> case merits a a small add-on to the spec or should we simply enfore the
> test and wait for code responsible for duplication to get fixed when
> facing the errors (after all, since the content-length is not defined as
> a comma-separated list, it should never appear more than once, but you
> know the difference between what we say and what we observe) ?


I think there are two concerns here:
  1) making the spec more complex
  2) making code implementing the spec more complex

Is it going to cause your implementation problems to refuse messages with two matching content-length headers?

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 05:31:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:25 GMT