- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 16:15:19 +0200
- To: Henrik Nordström <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 19.05.2010 21:55, Henrik Nordström wrote: > should we cover this gap? > > Probably should include something about the port which the request was > received on here, as is done by most known server implementations. Yes. This is a bug. It's *related* to issue 196 which defines the Effective Request URI (where the proposal already takes http vs https into account). Of course the "identified/addressed resource" and the "effective request URI" definitions need to be consistent. Now ticket 209 (<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/209>) Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 20 May 2010 14:16:04 UTC