Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 19:33:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>
To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Subject: Re: HTTP/1.1 (was Re: Paris) 
In-Reply-To: <9605151350.aa08082@paris.ics.uci.edu>
Message-Id: <Pine.HPP.3.93.960515192910.13494A-100000@ace.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com

On Wed, 15 May 1996, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> Keep in mind that the *last* thing we do will be to change the HTTP
> version stamp in the messages we send, and that won't occur until after
> the IESG has accepted HTTP/1.1 as an RFC.  However, we can implement
> everything beforehand as HTTP/1.0 and there won't be any problems.

Well, not *everything*. Though I do note in the spec that most things
related to version numbers key off the client version number, not the
server. Which means for the most part, we can implement the 1.1
features while calling ourselves 1.0.

[chunked]

> Yep, and even that can be left to mod_actions (I think) and CGI scripts.
> We may want to write a module that upgrades old CGI script output.

mod_cgi, actually. And I very strongly think that CGI scripts should
not have to worry about chunked input and output. The server should
(and can, quite well) handle it for them, translating before passing
on to the CGI script. After all, if it had to worry about chunking
things, it wouldn't be that Common, would it...

[snip]

> This will also change next week -- persistence will be the default for 1.1
> and "Connection: close" will turn it off.

Here's one... we can't do this until we call ourselves HTTP/1.1 in our
response. Otherwise, the client will think we're a HTTP/1.0 server and
may not expect the connection to be left open.

> > And actually, we don't support the Host header as per the HTTP/1.1
> > spec. 1.1 says we need to send a 400 if a request is tagged as
> > HTTP/1.1 (what if it's a higher version; the spec doesn't say. Roy?)
> > and doesn't have a Host header.
> 
> Only 1.1 (for now).

Hmm. Okay.

> There will be major changes to the caching sections (and associated
> requirements) over the next two weeks.  I'd say focus on getting Apache/1.1
> out now as good HTTP/1.0 support, so that two weeks from now we can 
> focus on a major HTTP/1.1 push and have it all tested prior to the
> RFC acceptance (last week in June, most likely).

I agree. For Apache 1.2, I'd like to see HTTP/1.1 support, plus
user-friendly things like autoconf and maybe a graphical config
interface.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us>      The Apache HTTP Server
URL: http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/   http://www.apache.org/
 
      "War does not determine who is right, only who is left."