httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randy Terbush <ra...@zyzzyva.com>
Subject Re: HTTP/1.1 header problem (fwd)
Date Sat, 21 Dec 1996 04:38:20 GMT
> 	yah know I think we might be wrong. I'm reading the 1.0 spec:
> 
> HTTP/1.0 clients must: 
> 
>      recognize the format of the Status-Line for HTTP/1.0 responses; 
>      understand any valid response in the format of HTTP/0.9 or HTTP/1.0. 
> 
> 	That looks like if we send http/1.1 they can bail if they
> want.
> 
> 	I haven't read the whole spec, mind you.
> 
> 	Isn't Roy our local HTTP cop? What does Roy have to say? I
> hope he isn't on vacation or something.

Unfortunately, Roy is on vacation in Australia and indicated that
he may be out of touch for a good long while.


> > Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that they have a point. It's not
> > really reasonable to say that an http/1.1 server should respond to a 1.0
> > request with a 1.1 response, since that obviously is a major change in the
> > operating functionality according to the 1.0 spec.
> > 
> > Yes, according to the 1.1 spec, it should be able to respond with either,
> > but this seems like a change that should never have been made - since it
> > plainly goes against the statement about it being compatible with the other
> > versions of the same major version.
> > 
> > Granted, up till seeing this comment I was in agreement with everyone else
> > about this, but this throws a minor wrench in the works.
> > 
> > -- Nathan
> > 
> > At 1:30 AM +0000 12/21/96, Rob Hartill wrote:
> > >Duh...
> > >
> > >stuborn fools.
> > >
> > >----- Forwarded message from George Boyce -----
> > >
> > >Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 16:22:18 -0800
> > >From: George Boyce <grboyce@aol.net>
> > >Message-Id: <9612201622.ZM12295@spyder.office.aol.com>
> > >Reply-To: web-support@aol.net
> > >X-Mailer: Z-Mail-SGI (3.2S.3 08feb96 MediaMail)
> > >To: apache-bugs@apache.org
> > >Subject: HTTP/1.1 header problem
> > >Cc: web-support@aol.net, web-access@aol.net
> > >Mime-Version: 1.0
> > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >I am responsible for the operation of the AOL web access service.
> > >
> > >Last week my development team gave me a new version of our system. Among the
> > >changes was a "fix" to allow connections only from HTTP/1.0 compliant servers.
> > >There are at least four issues with this fix...
> > >
> > >1. We should not have installed code which changes the behaviour of the
> > >service
> > >without a discussion of the changes. We should have seen the other problems
> > >coming and taken responsible action to minimize the impact. I think
> > >development
> > >agrees with me but only time will tell.
> > >
> > >2. We discovered a bug in this code which sometimes incorrectly identified the
> > >type of headers being returned. A fix for this will be installed as soon as
> > >possible.
> > >
> > >3. We have not supported HTTP/0.9 for a while so that was no change.
> > >
> > >4. But a recent version of the apache server does send HTTP/1.1 headers even
> > >when contacted by a HTTP/1.0 browser and proxy. After careful thought and loud
> > >debate, I lost, and we consider this to be inconsistent with the HTTP/1.0
> > >spec.
> > >We also consider our error message to be consistent with the HTTP/1.1 spec,
> > >though our service is certainly not HTTP/1.1 compliant, and of course it isn't
> > >very friendly to our members.
> > >
> > >The 1.0 spec doesn't allow the server to respond with a 1.1 response:
> > >
> > >http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/1.0/spec.html
> > ><<
> > >HTTP/1.0 servers must:
> > >...
> > >     respond appropriately with a message in the same protocol version used
by
> > >the client.
> > >>>
> > >
> > >And our proxy is responding with an error as even the 1.1 spec allows.
> > >
> > >http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-07.txt
> > ><<
> > >Since the protocol version indicates the protocol capability of the sender,
a
> > >proxy/gateway MUST never send a message with a version indicator which is
> > >greater than its actual version; if a higher version request is received, the
> > >proxy/gateway MUST either downgrade the request version, respond with an
> > >error,
> > >or switch to tunnel behavior.
> > >>>
> > >
> > >In the spirit of making things work, our development team will work on a
> > >way to
> > >downgrade HTTP/1.1 requests and responses to HTTP/1.0. Until then, would you
> > >folks consider having your server respond to HTTP/1.0 requests with HTTP/1.0
> > >replies?
> > >
> > >Looking forward to your reply. We certainly want the AOL web access service
to
> > >work with the apache server. Please don't listen to those few who yell at AOL
> > >for all of our screwups in the past and future. We generally had a reason for
> > >most of them; it is really difficult to run a reliable service for this many
> > >people.
> > >
> > >George
> > >
> > >--
> > >George Boyce
> > >Director, AOL/GNN Internet Ops, 703.453.4152, Fax: 453.4013, grboyce@aol.net
> > >
> > >----- End of forwarded message from George Boyce -----
> > >
> > >--
> > >Rob Hartill.       Internet Movie Database Ltd.    http://www.imdb.com/
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Nathan Neulinger                  Univ. of Missouri - Rolla
> > EMail: nneul@umr.edu                  Computing Services
> > WWW: http://www.umr.edu/~nneul      SysAdmin: rollanet.org
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-986-8770
> President					FAX:     510-986-8777
> C2Net 		    C2Net is having a party: http://www.c2.net/party/
> http://www.c2.net/				sameer@c2.net




Mime
View raw message