Re: Comments on Byte range draft

On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Ari Luotonen wrote:

> 
> > Unfortunately, this isn't true. The rule is: if you see a response code 
> > that you don't understand, you must treat it as if the code was <N>00, 
> > where <N> is the first character of the response code. Thus, a conformant 
> > HTTP/1.0 system should treat a code '205' as code '200'. 
> 
> Nevertheless, the current practice in proxies is to be safe and not
> cache anything that isn't 200.  So it will be backwords compatible
> with existing implementations.

In that case, the HTTP/1.0 spec is incorrect, and must be changed, either 
to put in a special case for 2XX series results; the general case is 
still needed as it has been used in several places. 

Simon

Received on Monday, 13 November 1995 17:29:12 UTC