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

Re: question about :authority header field

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 10:40:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnX+6Zw9RQi4idz9mx2vbdjNORyB3guRSZyBx3T40m8tAw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <tatsuhiro.t@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 23 October 2013 05:56, Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <tatsuhiro.t@gmail.com> wrote:
> As described in origin-form and asterisk-form, HTTP/2 server is expected to
> process the request which lacks :authority as valid, where in draft-06,
> server rejects it if :host is missing. Is this correct?

Your examples are all correct.

The major change between HTTP/2.0 and HTTP/1.1 is that the host header
is now optional.  It can be omitted if the absolute form (i.e.,
:authority) is used.  In fact, we obliquely encourage implementations
to omit host.

This places a constraint on an implementation that converts from 2.0
to 1.1; if host is not set it has to copy it from :authority.

But nothing has really changed other than that, host -> host and URL
authority -> :authority.
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2013 17:41:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:18 UTC