- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 16:00:29 +0100
- To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
- CC: SM <sm@resistor.net>, ietf@ietf.org, Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 17.12.2010 15:33, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote: > 17.12.2010 16:29, Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 17.12.2010 15:20, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote: >>> ... >>> In previous version there have been the 'server' and 'client' terms >>> instead 'host'. However it is obvious for me that there can be as >>> servers as clients that do not recognize some headers of another side of >>> exchange. >>> ... >> >> But clients can't respond with the header, so there's no point in >> pretending this applies to them. > In my document the term 'header' means 'header field' since client are > able to put any header to the request and I meant just it. I realize that you use "header" as synonym for "header field". What I was trying to say was that it doesn't make sense to speak of clients and servers in general, when it's really only the server who can set the H-N-R header field. Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 17 December 2010 15:01:10 UTC