W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2018

Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-replay-03, "5.1. The Early-Data Header Field"

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 12:00:13 +0200
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20180515100013.GC23881@1wt.eu>
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:38:11PM +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Sure - although that's pretty broken for Host, this isn't a completely
> uncommon thing. When we did SOAPAction way back when (shudder), we came to
> the conclusion that some HTTP implementations might drop empty headers, so it
> wasn't safe -- but I don't remember how much data that was based upon.
> That said, just because it's possible with HTTP headers doesn't mean it needs
> to be possible with structured headers.

I agree. I've also seen some components drop them and we'd rather not
rely on them.

Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2018 10:00:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:59 UTC