- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 15:21:02 PST
- To: HTTP Working Group <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com>, Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
- Cc: jg@w3.org
I'll go for MUST 505. Any counter-opinions? -----Original Message----- From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com> To: HTTP Working Group <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> Cc: jg@w3.org <jg@w3.org> Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 9:24 AM Subject: 505 response a MUST? > > Another issue found while trying to document supported features > (there appears to be some value to this rather tedious exercise :) > > draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-rev-01 defines: > > 10.5.6 505 HTTP Version Not Supported > > The server does not support, or refuses to support, the HTTP protocol > version that was used in the request message. The server is indicating > that it is unable or unwilling to complete the request using the same > major version as the client, as described in section 3.1, other than > with this error message. The response SHOULD contain an entity > describing why that version is not supported and what other protocols > are supported by that server. > > ... and section 3.1 spells out various rules about version number > usage, but does not specify that a server MUST send a 505 response > if it receives a major version number higher than the highest > version it implements. > > I've tried a few of the servers out there, and they all return > success when I send HTTP/2.0 requests (which were 1.1 requests with > 2.0 labels). > >-- >Scott Lawrence EmWeb Embedded Server <lawrence@agranat.com> >Agranat Systems, Inc. Engineering http://www.agranat.com/ > >
Received on Friday, 27 February 1998 15:23:34 UTC