- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:34:16 -0800
- To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@w3.org>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
>Trailer > >The Trailer general field value indicates that the given set of header >fields are present in the trailer of a message encoded with chunked >transfer-coding. > > Trailer = "Trailer" ":" 1#field-name > >An HTTP/1.1 sender MAY include a Trailer header field in a message using >chunked transfer-coding with a non-empty trailer. Doing so allows the >recipient to know which header fields to expect in the trailer. > >If no Trailer header field is present, the trailer SHOULD NOT include any >other header fields than Content-MD5 and Authentication-Info. I don't think this exception is necessary. As far as I know, none of the existing HTTP/1.1 servers put anything in the trailer yet. >A server MUST NOT include any other header fields unless the "chunked" >transfer-coding is present in the request as an accepted transfer-coding in >the Accept-Transfer field. Likewise, that is unnecessary. We can live with the discrepancy between RFC 2068 and now, since nobody uses these features yet. Somebody should correct me if I'm wrong [and they do care]. >Message headers listed in the Trailer header field MUST NOT include the >Transfer-Encoding and the Trailer header field. and Content-Length. ....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 1997 14:26:50 UTC