- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 21:45:29 PDT
- To: "Josh Cohen (Exchange)" <joshco@exchange.microsoft.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
> > b) not require that a server respond with an error if the Host > > header were missing (since HTTP/1.1 clients should only > > send absolute URIs to proxies.) > > > I will double check, but my reading of the spec says that > origin servers need to understand absoluteURIs. Yes. > If they > receive an absolute URI, what is the point of requiring > a host header? To insure that clients will send them, without a doubt, since the client->server request is made without knowing the compliance of the server its sending them to. As was pointed out in a private communication, there might be older proxies that would forward GET http://example.com/path HTTP/1.1 to 'example.com' merely as GET /path HTTP/1.1 without adding a Host header. However, if the client supplies GET http://example.com/path HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com then the proxy would forward GET /path HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com So clients should send Host headers even with absolute URLs when talking to proxies, which is the only time they should send absolute URLs. So clients should send Host headers always. So servers should insure that clients are compliant by always requiring Host headers, even with absolute URLs. Larry
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 1999 21:48:58 UTC