W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: P1: Content-Length SHOULD be sent

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 00:11:38 +0100
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20121204231138.GB11107@1wt.eu>
Hi Martin,

On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 03:08:01PM -0800, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 4 December 2012 15:05, Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> >>    6.  If this is a request message and none of the above are true, then
> >>        the message body length is zero (no message body is present).
> >
> > I think it should simply state
> >
> >     6.  If this is a request message and none of the above are true, then
> >         the message contains no body.
> 
> Is it really useful to distinguish between no body and body with no
> content?  I can't imagine a use for such a distinction.

I think the example with the POST that is rejected without a content-length
is valid, I have already observed this one, though I don't remember on
what server.

Willy
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2012 23:12:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 4 December 2012 23:12:13 GMT