On 9/26/2011 10:46 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: > On 26.09.2011 17:35, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> All looks good… testing passes w/ no regressions so I'll >> likely tag and roll tomorrow AM. > > Is there consensus how to handle the range "0-" returns 200 problem? It > looks like the discussion for 2.2 is still open, but I haven't checked > whether that influences the 2.0 patch.
Agreed, if people decide our handling of range "0-" is not desirable, this would seem to be a showstopper on all three branches. Personally, I find the current behavior acceptable by the spec and per the underlying errata Roy has suggested. Clients should not be able to shift trivial processing (which the client is perfectly capable of performing) to the server in ways that increase network traffic or server load. HTTP/1.1 conversations must be designed to efficiently utilize network bandwidth, and these particular clients did not do that. I'm on the fence whether we should restore such abuse.
