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

Re: P1: Content-Length SHOULD be sent

From: Jonathan Ballard <dzonatas@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 15:41:47 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAPAK-61hzbVaEaV5E_TG3ovLnfDm-E+ev--2f6rmDMRnrb1sg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Cc: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, 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>
Maybe media suffixes SHOULD be allowed on Content-Length: without type.

Content-Length: 1234+ic

Multiplication of values are symmetric to octets with such suffix. That
would require no random order on Content-Type:.

Solved?

On Tuesday, December 4, 2012, Willy Tarreau wrote:

> Hi Adrien,
>
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:19:33AM +0000, Adrien W. de Croy wrote:
> > >>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.
> > >
> > maybe that's a bug in that server?
>
> not necessarily, don't forget that we're both reading this with our
> intermediary author hat on, and we're mostly interested in getting
> messaging right. But for application servers, some subtilities may
> very well make a difference. Especially considering what was said in
> 2616 about how to detect presence of a message body and the requirement
> for POST requests to carry a message body.
>
> Willy
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 23:42:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 6 December 2012 23:42:20 GMT