Re: HTTP response version, again

Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, M. Hedlund wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Dave Kristol wrote:
> > > I still consider the question unresolved as to what version an HTTP/1.x
> > > server should return for an HTTP/1.0 request.
> > [...]
> > > Case 1 (return HTTP/1.0 to HTTP/1.0 request):
> > > Case 2 (return HTTP/1.1 to HTTP/1.0 request):
> > 
> > I agree with Dave that Case 1 is preferable.  AOL's proxies apparently
> > started giving users errors this week when a new version of Apache was
> > released, which responded to 1.0 requests with 1.1 responses (Case 2).  
> > While this instance will likely be fixed next week, it does indicate how an
> > HTTP/1.0 client can be confused by an HTTP/1.1 response.
> No, it indicates how a company with little concern for standards can dictate
> implementations in other products through technological inertia.  There's
> nothing in the 1.1 response which should cause problems with the 1.0 proxy or
> 1.0 client - section 3.1 of both the 1.0 and 1.1 specs promise this, and (as
> best this group can tell) 1.1 fulfills this promise.  

I agree with Brian here.  Case 2 is the preferable solution.  For a
start it's the only easy way I can see of allowing my (HTTP/1.1
compliant) browser can establish persistent connections with 1.1 proxies
without requiring an extra request just to test it out.  I am not willing
to rely on some of the more obscure methods (such as OPTIONS) not being
implemented in a 1.0 proxy either.

My browser keeps a list of sites recently visited and their HTTP version
precisely so it can avoid confusing them.

I read the message that the AOL proxy has been issuing that blames the
remote site for the failure (in Apache Week).  It would seem that their
proxy does not implement HTTP/1.0 correctly if it does not accept a
response in the same major version (which is all servers have to provide)

Stewart Brodie, Electronics & Computer Science, Southampton University.

Received on Saturday, 21 December 1996 12:27:22 UTC