httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <field...@gbiv.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r218978 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES modules/proxy/mod_proxy_http.c
Date Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:34:35 GMT
>   * RFC 2616 says
>
>     "All HTTP/1.1 applications MUST be able to receive and decode the
>      "chunked" transfer-coding, and MUST ignore chunk-extension 
> extensions
>      they do not understand."
>
>     I read this as "an HTTP/1.1 server must accept "chunked" or quit
>     reporting it complies with the HTTP/1.1 specification".

No, you should read it as an HTTP/1.1 server MUST be able to receive
and decode the "chunked" transfer-coding, because that's what I wrote.
In other words, it must be able to parse the message.

> All of it, except for the preference to RB_STREAM_CHUNKED when,
> perhaps, we could be more sub-optimal, falling back on RB_SPOOL_CL.
>
> Many RB_STREAM_CL choices, before, were equally dangerous, and that
> C-L == length_read test in the stream_reqbody_chunked() was meant
> to exclude future abuse.

We should be sending C-L if the brigade includes the entire message.
CL is always preferred for requests.  The only time we should send
T-E on a proxied request is if we cannot buffer enough of the
received request to know how large it will be.

>   * No longer upgrade HTTP/1.0 requests to the origin server as
>     HTTP/1.1 unless the force-proxy-request-1.1 envvar is set.
>     [William Rowe]

-1 (veto), since it is a clear violation of

    http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2145.txt

and the intent of HTTP versions.

....Roy


Mime
View raw message