Re: Sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 allow bogus Content-Length?

On Feb 14, 2017, at 3:15 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <> wrote:
> Last year, I think, I have had some dude claim that a "valid value"
> was a sequence of digits, but that there is no explicit requirement
> that it match the length of the body of that request.
> I told him to get stuffed.

Out of morbid curiosity, what semantics did he expect?

Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2017 21:48:39 UTC