- From: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 19:29:25 -0600
- To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Piotr Dobrogost <p@ietf.dobrogost.net>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> On 2013-01-16 00:38, Piotr Dobrogost wrote: >>> I guess what Nico had in mind is if this subject could be clarified in >>> 2.0 so that we won't have problems we have now in the future. >> >> >> What problem, exactly? >> >> Given a valid message, you can combine header fields as specified in the >> spec. But you don't have to. > > You shouldn't if you're a middlebox. > On the server side, it is a good idea to merge headers. There's no point for a server framework to return multiple values for one header name - application will have to merge them anyway before parsing. (Java Servlet for example does not merge headers; it's a source of bug; fortunately clients usually don't split headers) On the client side, it's probably the same story (except Set-Cookie) Zhong Yu
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2013 01:29:53 UTC