httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dirk.vanGulik" <Dirk.vanGu...@jrc.it>
Subject Re: Additional comments on the Host: header.... (fwd)
Date Tue, 19 Mar 1996 08:38:40 GMT
>
> While we should handle the "Host:" header, the tone of this message is 
> that John (the IETF APPS area chair) prefers to see HTTP/1.1 servers 
> handle the full URL in the request field instead of a combination of the 
> relative URL and the Host: header.  In other words, he would rather see
> 
> GET http://www.organic.com/index.html HTTP/1.1
> 
> instead of
> 
> GET /index.html HTTP/1.1
> Host: www.organic.com
> 
> For doing virtual-hosts.  How difficult would it be to handle the former 
> in addition to the latter?  It makes sense to start implementing this as 
> soon as possible, so that when clients start supporting it we can migrate 
> away from burning IP numbers... :)
> 

I'd be very much in favour of the following scheme, which fits well
with the URN/URC and proxy we have here:

1. All 'new' servers should be able to understand both

	GET http://something/somewhere HTTP/1.x
	GET somewhere HTTP/1.y

   Wether x and y can be 1 and 0 is open to debate, I would be in
   favour of having y=0 only and x=0 or 1.

2. All (current) servers should be able to understand 
   the Host: something line. 

3. All 'new' clients do a 

	GET somewhere HTTP/1.0
	Host: something

   while we are still in http 1.0

Does this make sense.

Dw.

Mime
View raw message