- 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