"?> Re: Proposed text for "Routing Data's relationship to headers" (Issue 23) from Poul-Henning Kamp on 2013-03-13 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from January to March 2013)

W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Proposed text for "Routing Data's relationship to headers" (Issue 23)

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 21:36:26 +0000
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1989.1363210586@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <5140C20A.8050402@isode.com>, Alexey Melnikov writes:
>The ticket reads:
>> Right now, routing data (in particular, :scheme, :host and :path) 
>> appear as headers along with the rest. This means that the recipient 
>> needs to parse through the header collection to find them -- 
>> potentially at the end. Different ways of addressing this have been 
>> proposed; e.g., requiring them to be at the top of the header block, 
>> or serialising them in different fields.
>I am proposing to add the following text to both "Request" and 
>"Response" subsections of the "HTTP Request/Response" section:
>     All header field names starting with ":" (whether defined in this 
>document or future
>     extensions to this document) MUST appear before any other header 

I would go a step further:

	Header fields must appear in the order :scheme, :host, :path,
	followed by any other headers starting with ':' (whether ...)
	followed by the remaining headers.

This will make life easier for any high-speed device.

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2013 21:36:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:10 UTC