- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 03:14:17 +1200
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 25/07/2014 2:09 a.m., Martin Thomson wrote: > On 24 July 2014 06:52, Amos Jeffries wrote: >> The recipient of that 1.1 request is supposed to assume path value of >> "/" in these cases not "*". > > The link Kari provided shows that there is an exception for OPTIONS > requests in the absolute form that address an HTTP URI with path-empty > form. > > https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/httpbis/specs/rfc7230.html#rfc.section.5.3.4 > Oh, right. I missed that. (I'm not getting Kari's mails for some reason, just your replies). > That seems pretty explicit to me. Maybe you can look at the editor's > draft and see if my latest tweaks have corrected this. > I forsee a problem with the current editors draft text for proxies relaying this in the h2->1.1 direction since the following is a valid URL request: OPTIONS http://some.host* HTTP/1.1 IMHO it be more correct to say simply that :path may be omitted on OPTIONS and represents a request for "*" asterisk-form? as opposed to a 0-length :path field which represents the path-empty case. CONNECT requests provides precedent for omission. Amos
Received on Thursday, 24 July 2014 15:15:18 UTC