- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 05:38:35 +0100
- To: "Backman, Annabelle" <richanna@amazon.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hello Annabelle, On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:30:28PM +0000, Backman, Annabelle wrote: > In light of the discussion regarding support for absent header fields in HTTP > Message Signatures<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/1976>, I'd > like to ask the perhaps obvious question: does HTTP permit header fields to > make a semantic distinction between the header field being absent from a > message, and the header field being present with field value equal to the > empty string? If so, are there real-world use cases that people are aware of > for this that might help inform that discussion? We have such an example with the Host header field. Its presence is mandatory in HTTP/1.1, though if you don't know what value to put in it, an empty field will often work with plenty of servers and will give you a response instead of a "400 bad request". There's also Accept-Encoding (and probably more generally other Accept* though I'm not sure), where absence means anything is accepted while emptiness indicates nothing is accepted: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7231#section-5.3.4 Hoping this helps, Willy
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2022 04:38:52 UTC