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

Re: [Bug 160] IF_HEADERS_CAN_GET_LONG

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:42:05 -0800
Message-Id: <3c9338ae51ab95559945564dc9fbfe9a@osafoundation.org>
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, WebDav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, Joel Soderberg <joels@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Joel Soderberg brought this up; it should be part of those interop 
notes, and yes, it was an actual experienced problem as far as I can 
remember.

Lisa

On Nov 24, 2005, at 7:55 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

>
> Cullen Jennings wrote:
>> Just to educate me, what is the limit on header length and where is 
>> that
>> defined?
>
> I don't think that there is a defined limit (see 
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#message.headers>).
>
> The concern was that clients/proxies/servers may indeed be limited, 
> and because the "If" header in theory can get very complex, that would 
> become a problem.
>
> What I would like to understand *before* changing RFC2518 is whether 
> the potential implementation limits are in header length, or in header 
> *line* length. In the latter case, the solution would be to just use 
> CRLF inside header lines, as allowed by RFC2616.
>
> Did anybody actually ever experience a problem? If not, I'd recommend 
> just leave things as they are in RFC2518.
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2005 17:42:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:11 GMT