> Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > Just to clarify... Unless a case is clearly demonstrated where HTTP/1.1 protocol is
being
> > used with a client that should have been negotiated down to HTTP/1.0, then this is
>not
a
> > defect. We should not change the "HTTP/1.1" string in the response.
>
> >>I quickly reviewed the PR and the example does not demonstrate the reported
>problem.
The
> >>response is HTTP/1.0 compliant. That the server responds with "HTTP/1.1" is not
> > relevant.
>
> >>>http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8357
>
> I agree with you in regard to
>
> SetEnv force-no-vary
> SetEnv downgrade-1.0
>
> But the reporter is also using
>
> SetEnv force-response-1.0
>
> According to the docs here:
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/env.html#special
> The point of that was to deal with silly proxies that belched when they
> saw "HTTP/1.1" (regardless of the actual protocol version of the
> response).
Really? I don't intuit that from the doc though you may be right. The behaviour being
observed is how 1.3 has been working for years (pretty sure anyway) and to the best of
my
knowledge, it is not breaking anything. Would be interested in knowing what exactly is
breaking with this PR.
Bill
