Re: HTTP 1.1 issue 15: 14.23 Host
Ross Patterson (ROSSP@SS1.Reston.VMD.Sterling.COM)
Wed, 11 Nov 98 12:15:58 EST
jg@pa.dec.com (Jim Gettys) writes:
>Actually, Roy, I see Ross's point here: it says "on the Internet". Some
>might misinterpret this on a LAN or intranet. I agree there should be
>no reference to TCP or other transport protocols in this paragraph, of
>course, for the reasons you give.
Right.
>So I think striking the two phrases "on the Internet", and the word
>"Internet-based" from the paragraph will reduce the wriggle room of
>implementers to get it wrong. The result would be:
>
>
> "A client MUST include a Host header field in all HTTP/1.1 request
> messages (i.e., on any message corresponding to a
> request for a URL which includes an Internet host address for the
> service being requested). If the Host field is not already
> present, an HTTP/1.1 proxy MUST add a Host field to the request
> message prior to forwarding it. All
> HTTP/1.1 servers MUST respond with a 400 (Bad Request) status code
> to any HTTP/1.1 request message which lacks a Host header field."
That's clearer, and jibes with the MUST in section 9.
>I don't think that any arguments to allow the host header to be dropped
>for PDA use are compelling enough to relax this requirement in this way.
Indeed, one could argue that a PDA if RF/infrared/whatever communication
with its base station should send Host headers if the URL includes a
host address for the base station (e.g., running IP-on-the-air ala
AMPRNet). By the same argument, if the URL requested by the PDA doesn't
include a host address, no Host header is required (although that
violates section 9).
Ross Patterson
VM Software Division
Sterling Software, Inc.