W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: #273: HTTP-Version should be redefined as fixed length pair of DIGIT . DIGIT

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:58:43 +0200
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110624045843.GC28406@1wt.eu>
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 09:53:31AM +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2011-06-23 00:08, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> >It should treat it the same as receiving a message like this:
> >
> >GET / HTTP/A.B
> >
> >which hopefully we cover already...
> 
> Really?
> 
> I would have thought that an HTTP/1.1 compliant recipient would accept 
> something labeled HTTP/1.10.

Julian, I have seen many times the version checked with :

    memcmp(version, "HTTP/1.1", 8)

One of the reasons probably is that the next char might be either a CR or
an LF, so it's not easy to quickly check for an exact version. But as a
result of the above, "HTTP/1.10" would be matched as "HTTP/1.1".

> If it does, and we change the spec, we will make it non-compliant.

I don't think this is an issue, because even if the server understands
HTTP/1.10 as major=1, minor=10, it will just not know this version, and
the draft states that such a version will not exist anyway since only
one digit can be used for the minor.

In my opinion, it would be an issue if we had already used such a version,
which is not the case. Even HTTP/0.9 was post-named with a single digit.

Regards,
Willy
Received on Friday, 24 June 2011 04:59:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:41 GMT