- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 23:52:25 PST
- To: paulh@imc.org
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Looks good. A few minor points: > If HTTP-to-MIME canonicalization is performed, the value of a > Content-Length header field of the HTTP data must be updated to > reflect the new body length. MIME does not contain a content-length header (any more). In fact, I cannot find the string "content-length" in any extant RFC. I know some mail clients send content-length, but it is non-standard. (I might conjecture that mail doesn't have content-length for the same reasons why HTTP->MIME gateways should remove it: because encodings or canonicalization might change it.) Perhaps this should be titled Introduction of Content-Length and rewritten accordingly. > An HTTP client may include a Content-Transfer-Encoding as an extension > Entity-Header in a POST request when it knows the destination of that > request is a proxy or gateway to a MIME-compliant protocol. How is a client to know this?? I think this paragraph should just be removed.
Received on Thursday, 25 January 1996 23:54:53 UTC