Re: Работа с кастомными дублирующимися HTTP-заголовками запроса

[Evgeniy Berdnikov]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:42:47PM +0300, Dmitry Ivanov wrote:
> > X-Custom-Header: value1
> > X-Custom-Header: value2
> 
> Вы уверены, что использование 2-х одинаковых заголовков как-то
> регламентировано в RFC?

 RFC2616:

   Multiple message-header fields with the same field-name MAY be
   present in a message if and only if the entire field-value for that
   header field is defined as a comma-separated list [i.e.,
   #(values)]. It MUST be possible to combine the multiple header
   fields into one "field-name: field-value" pair, without changing
   the semantics of the message, by appending each subsequent
   field-value to the first, each separated by a comma. The order in
   which header fields with the same field-name are received is
   therefore significant to the interpretation of the combined field
   value, and thus a proxy MUST NOT change the order of these field
   values when a message is forwarded.

 Практически это касается Set-Cookie, из-за того что в этом хедере
 может присутствовать expires, значение которого пишется с запятой.
-- 
 Eugene Berdnikov