httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From field...@ebuilt.com
Subject Re: 1.3.15
Date Tue, 24 Oct 2000 14:36:45 GMT
> Obviously Apache has not ever been fully 'up to speed' on this section
> particuarly regarding all the 'Server SHOULD' RFC directives which
> means there is only 'conditional compliance' and not 'full compliance.
> I've never seen a 406 from Apache 1.x. even when it SHOULD have been sent.

It isn't that simple.  Sending a 406 is only correct if the requested
resource is negotiable in format, which depends on the URL used.  What
we should be doing (and this is a known issue) is modify the media
type sent in content-type based on the accept-encoding field.  The
reason we don't do that is because it adds a certain randomness to
cache behavior.

> If patches were submitted to change the 'conditional' to 'full compliance'
> would they be accepted?

It depends on whether the rest of the patch sucked or not.  Rather than
have a pointless discussion about what might happen, just post the patch.

> http://www.RemoteCommunications.com/apache/ab/ - Free Enhanced ApacheBench
> http://www.RemoteCommunications.com/apache/mod_gzip/ - Free Apache Content 
> Acceleration module

While you are at it, please read our distribution license.  It expressly
forbids modifying our code and redistributing it with "Apache" in the
name without permission from the Apache Software Foundation.

....Roy

Mime
View raw message