- From: Dave Kristol <dmk@bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 17:13:22 -0500
- To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
- Cc: http working group <http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Jeffrey Mogul wrote: > [...] > (3) Also in section 14.36.1 Byte Ranges, before the paragraph that > starts "Examples of byte-ranges-specifier values ...", insert this > paragraph: > > If a syntactically valid byte-range-set includes at least one > byte-range-spec whose first-byte-pos is less than the current > length of the entity-body, or at least one > suffix-byte-range-spec with a non-zero suffix-length, then the > byte-range-set is satisfiable. Otherwise, the byte-range-set > is unsatisfiable. If the byte-range-set is unsatisfiable, the > server SHOULD return a response with a status of 416 (Requested > range not satisfiable). Otherwise, the server SHOULD return a > response with a status of 206 (Partial Content) containing the > satisfiable ranges of the entity-body. That's much clearer. But I think it's backward. I think 416 should mean the request (and therefore the client) is buggy. And if none of the ranges are satisfiable, return everything (pretend there's no Range header). I think it's a little strange to return an error if the Range header was well-formed and ignore Range if it's ill-formed. Dave Kristol
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 1997 14:18:09 UTC