- From: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 02:46:55 +1200
- To: Henrik Nordstrom <hno@squid-cache.org>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
It's quite an interesting interop issue though between 1.1 and 1.0, since there are more parts to a message than just the headers. e.g the status codes. The set for 1.0 is relatively small. If a sender is sending a status code back, surely it's required to sanitise it for the recipient? Or does it expect a downstream agent to pass it through yet only understand the major error code. Adrien Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > ons 2008-04-09 klockan 01:30 +1200 skrev Adrien de Croy: > > >> although it looks like RFC2145 ought to have been superseded... couple >> of issues in it. (precludes Expects from HTTP/1.1, suggests sending 505 >> response for version issues, even though this code not defined in HTTP/1.0) >> > > HTTP/1.0 isn't really relevant there.. > > 505 is to be returned if an HTTP/1.x server gets a HTTP/2.x or higher > request.. or if an HTTP/2.x only server gets a HTTP/1.x request. > > HTTP/1.X servers will never respond with 505 to HTTP/1.0 requests. > > Regards > Henrik > > -- Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.com
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2008 14:46:52 UTC