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

Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized-08.txt> ('Headers-Not-Recognized' HTTP Header Field) to Experimental RFC

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 16:00:29 +0100
Message-ID: <4D0B7B0D.7050105@gmx.de>
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
CC: SM <sm@resistor.net>, ietf@ietf.org, Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 17.12.2010 15:33, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
> 17.12.2010 16:29, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 17.12.2010 15:20, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>>> ...
>>> In previous version there have been the 'server' and 'client' terms
>>> instead 'host'. However it is obvious for me that there can be as
>>> servers as clients that do not recognize some headers of another side of
>>> exchange.
>>> ...
>>
>> But clients can't respond with the header, so there's no point in
>> pretending this applies to them.
> In my document the term 'header' means 'header field' since client are
> able to put any header to the request and I meant just it.

I realize that you use "header" as synonym for "header field".

What I was trying to say was that it doesn't make sense to speak of 
clients and servers in general, when it's really only the server who can 
set the H-N-R header field.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 17 December 2010 15:01:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:34 GMT