W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

[Bug 169] New: Date header required?

From: <bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 05:14:26 -0700
Message-Id: <200510191214.j9JCEQnh030183@ietf.cse.ucsc.edu>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org


           Summary: Date header required?
           Product: WebDAV-RFC2518-bis
           Version: -07
          Platform: Other
               URL: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-
        OS/Version: other
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: 08.  HTTP Methods for Distributed Authoring
        AssignedTo: joe-bugzilla@cursive.net
        ReportedBy: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de
         QAContact: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

The spec currently says:

"8.1.4 Required Response Headers: Date

Note that HTTP 1.1 requires the Date header in all responses if possible."

This is misleading; RFC2616 contains a long description of when "Date" is
required, in particular:

- snip -
   1. If the response status code is 100 (Continue) or 101 (Switching
Protocols), the response MAY include a Date header field, at the server's option.
   2. If the response status code conveys a server error, e.g. 500 (Internal
Server Error) or 503 (Service Unavailable), and it is inconvenient or impossible
to generate a valid Date.
   3. If the server does not have a clock that can provide a reasonable
approximation of the current time, its responses MUST NOT include a Date header
field. In this case, the rules in Section 14.18.1 MUST be followed.
- snip -

I don't see why RFC2518 needs to say anything at all (it's an extension of
HTTP/1.1 after all), but if it does, it should make correct statements about
what HTTP 1.1 actually says.

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2005 12:14:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:33 UTC