- From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 00:39:47 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
fre 2009-07-24 klockan 20:26 +1000 skrev Mark Nottingham: > Just another point of data which has come up before: > > > HTTP/1.1 defines a Content-MD5 header that allows a server to > > include a digest of the response body. However, this is specifically > > defined to cover the body of the actual message, not the contents of > > the full file (which might be quite different, if the response is a > > Content- Range, or uses a delta encoding). > > That's the beginning of RFC3230, which is on the standards track. I know, and I obviously do not share the same view of HTTP as RFC3230, not only in this aspect, as I also tried to point out earlier. But with the amount of damage already done to Content-MD5 I am fine with deprecating it as historic if that is the seen as the viable solution to this discussion, effectively removing it from HTTPbis with a mention that there was a ambiguity in if this applied to the variant or the message-entity (or watever to call it, before T-E) of 206 responses. But I do not think that is needed to go that way as I would be very surprised if any implementation could be found implementing Content-MD5 on the partial entity of a 206 response and not the corresponding 200 response. I would expect that the implementations that can be found all implements Content-MD5 based on the corresponding 200 response. Regards Henrik
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 22:40:31 UTC