Erroneous handling of long request uris?
mdounin at mdounin.ru
Wed Feb 10 06:27:51 MSK 2010
On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 08:57:53PM -0500, mitch.socialcast wrote:
> To me, this suggests that the status-line-less response that
> nginx provides when it encounters an extremely long URI is not
> compliant with the HTTP 0.9 specification. If this is not the
> case, please let me know.
Do you actually read links you provided? The same document you
are citing states:
% <http version>
% identifies the HyperText Transfer Protocol version being used by
% the server. For the version described by this document version it
% is "HTTP/1.0" (without the quotes).
And obviously it's HTTP/1.0 specs, not HTTP/0.9.
Normative syntax for HTTP/0.9 (as well as one for HTTP/1.0) may be
found in RFC 1945, see here:
And it states that HTTP/0.9 response is just entity body.
> Regardless of our interpretations of the HTTP 0.9
> specification(s), I feel that the vast majority of HTTP clients
> have abandoned the nearly two-decade old HTTP 0.9 protocol in
> favor of HTTP 1.0 or 1.1 -- servers which implement these
> protocols clearly MUST return a status line in order to be
> compliant; in light of this does it really make sense to behave
> inappropriately according to the successors to HTTP 0.9 to
> ensure support for (what I assume to be) a miniscule fraction of
> the set of HTTP clients in 2010?
Well, I suggest re-reading RFC 2616 and RFC 1945.
More information about the nginx