- From: <bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 05:14:26 -0700
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169 Summary: Date header required? Product: WebDAV-RFC2518-bis Version: -07 Platform: Other URL: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav- rfc2518bis-07.html#rfc.section.8.1.4 OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: 08. HTTP Methods for Distributed Authoring AssignedTo: joe-bugzilla@cursive.net ReportedBy: julian.reschke@greenbytes.de QAContact: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org The spec currently says: "8.1.4 Required Response Headers: Date Note that HTTP 1.1 requires the Date header in all responses if possible." This is misleading; RFC2616 contains a long description of when "Date" is required, in particular: - snip - 1. If the response status code is 100 (Continue) or 101 (Switching Protocols), the response MAY include a Date header field, at the server's option. 2. If the response status code conveys a server error, e.g. 500 (Internal Server Error) or 503 (Service Unavailable), and it is inconvenient or impossible to generate a valid Date. 3. If the server does not have a clock that can provide a reasonable approximation of the current time, its responses MUST NOT include a Date header field. In this case, the rules in Section 14.18.1 MUST be followed. - snip - I don't see why RFC2518 needs to say anything at all (it's an extension of HTTP/1.1 after all), but if it does, it should make correct statements about what HTTP 1.1 actually says. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2005 12:14:29 UTC