Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Response for unsupported conditional request

On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 12:27:55AM -0500, Glenn Strauss wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 03:58:01PM +0000, Mike Kistler wrote:
> > > Start out with the base assumption that "unsupported" means unrecognized, for which there is the general requirement that recipients ignore unrecognized fields.
> > 
> > Is this true just for the conditional fields or for all fields? For example, can a recipient decide that it does not recognize "content-type" or "accept" fields and ignore these?
> 
> "can a recipient decide that it does not recognize ..."
> 
> That phrasing reads awkwardly.
> 
> A recipient not might look for these headers, and subsequently not
> take any action based on these headers for which it did not look.
> It really is as simple as that.

Exaactly. Let's keep in mind the good old HTTP servers we used to
write as shell scripts called from inetd. They *were* HTTP servers,
and they were just checking the method and the URI, ignoring any
header field and returning valid responses (sometimes including
content-length as checked from the delivered file).

Willy

Received on Saturday, 1 February 2025 06:38:09 UTC