I submitted a fix for this, and it has been accepted for release
5.5.24 and 6.0.14.
Bugzilla report: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42497
--
Len
On 5/16/07, Joe Mun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys... so according to the HTTP 1.1 spec (
On 5/16/07, Joe Mun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys... so according to the HTTP 1.1 spec (
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html), 304 Not Modified
responses must include the ETag in the header.
Well, according to RFC 2616's section 10.3.5 on 304 Not Modified
- ETag and/or
I think you've got that wrong.
1. Spec says:
The response MUST include the following header fields: ... - ETag
and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200
response to the same request
2. ETag header *was* sent in a 200 response to the same request. (See
the header logs
I might be wrong but I have a few doubts
On 5/19/07, Len Popp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you've got that wrong.
1. Spec says:
The response MUST include the following header fields: ... - ETag
and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200
response to the same
On 5/19/07, Rashmi Rubdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. Spec says:
The response MUST include the following header fields: ... - ETag
and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200
response to the same request
Just to test this, I created a JSP and put a jsp:froward tag
It's hypothetical. It says *if* the header *would have* been sent in
a 200 response to the same request. I can know what Tomcat would have
done, because I've seen what it *does* do with requests that are
identical. In my test case, Tomcat *would have* included an ETag
header *if* it responded 200
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rashmi,
Rashmi Rubdi wrote:
1. Spec says:
The response MUST include the following header fields: ... - ETag
and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200
response to the same request
By *same request* , I think you are
On 5/19/07, Christopher Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rashmi,
Rashmi Rubdi wrote:
1. Spec says:
The response MUST include the following header fields: ... - ETag
and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200
response to the same request
By *same request* , I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rashmi,
Rashmi Rubdi wrote:
Thank you both for clarifying, I understand what you're saying.
[snip]
And the definition of ETag :
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.19
mentions entity-tag , which is also the value of a
On 5/19/07, Christopher Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rashmi,
Rashmi Rubdi wrote:
Thank you both for clarifying, I understand what you're saying.
[snip]
And the definition of ETag :
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.19
mentions entity-tag , which is also the
On 5/19/07, Christopher Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Len, I recommend you cross-post this (if you haven't already) to the
tomcat-dev mailing list to see what they have to say.
I will do this, today if I have time.
--
Len
-Original Message-
From: Rashmi Rubdi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 3:10 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Missing ETag in 304 Header
On 5/16/07, Joe Mun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys... so according to the HTTP 1.1 spec (
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616
: Missing ETag in 304 Header
On 5/16/07, Joe Mun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys... so according to the HTTP 1.1 spec (
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html),
304 Not Modified
responses must include the ETag in the header. However,
Tomcat doesn't seem
to be adding
On 5/16/07, Joe Mun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys... so according to the HTTP 1.1 spec (
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html), 304 Not Modified
responses must include the ETag in the header. However, Tomcat doesn't seem
to be adding it...
I am serving a static text file,
14 matches
Mail list logo
