- From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:57:09 -0500
- To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
>>>>> "RTF" == Roy T Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu> writes: >> If no Trailer header field is present, the trailer SHOULD NOT include any >> other header fields than Content-MD5 and Authentication-Info. RTF> I don't think this exception is necessary. As far as I know, none of the RTF> 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. RTF> Likewise, that is unnecessary. We can live with the discrepancy between RTF> RFC 2068 and now, since nobody uses these features yet. Somebody should RTF> correct me if I'm wrong [and they do care]. Released versions of EmWeb have been putting these in chunked trailers for several months. -- Scott Lawrence EmWeb Embedded Server <lawrence@agranat.com> Agranat Systems, Inc. Engineering http://www.agranat.com/
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 1997 15:11:31 UTC