Received: (qmail 17108 invoked by uid 2012); 25 Oct 1999 22:57:33 -0000 Message-Id: <19991025225733.17099.qmail@hyperreal.org> Date: 25 Oct 1999 22:57:33 -0000 From: Wade Oberpriller Reply-To: oberpwd@network.com To: apbugs@hyperreal.org Subject: Server response missing Header for 400 Bad Request X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.2 >Number: 5196 >Category: protocol >Synopsis: Server response missing Header for 400 Bad Request >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: medium >Responsible: apache >State: closed >Class: sw-bug >Submitter-Id: apache >Arrival-Date: Mon Oct 25 17:10:02 PDT 1999 >Last-Modified: Tue Oct 26 09:10:02 PDT 1999 >Originator: oberpwd@network.com >Organization: >Release: 1.3.3 >Environment: SunOS nsplab14 5.6 Generic_105181-12 sun4u sparc SUNW,UltraSPARC-IIi-Engine >Description: Sending a POST message with a missing resource (POST HTTP/1.1), and the server responds with HTML markup and no header. The markup looks like such: 400 Bad Request .... Tested this versus a Microsoft Web server and it behaved correctly. >How-To-Repeat: nsplab14.network.com >Fix: >Audit-Trail: State-Changed-From-To: open-closed State-Changed-By: marc State-Changed-When: Mon Oct 25 17:19:16 PDT 1999 State-Changed-Why: I seen no problem with Apache's behaviour. A HTTP request must be either a method and a URI or it must be a method and a URI and a protocol version. The first case is for HTTP/0.9. The latter is for HTTP/1.0 and 1.1. Apache treats your request as a HTTP/0.9 request which happens to have a invalid URI. That is a perfectly valid way of treating it (and, arguably, the only valid way). Since HTTP/0.9 responses do not include response headers, Apache doesn't include them in that response. From: Marc Slemko To: Apache bugs database Cc: Subject: Re: protocol/5196: Server response missing Header for 400 Bad Request (fwd) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:52:22 -0600 (MDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 09:09:09 -0500 (CDT) From: Wade D. Oberpriller To: marc@apache.org Subject: Re: protocol/5196: Server response missing Header for 400 Bad Request Good point. Yes that makes sense now, and I agree that is the "correct" way to handle that type of malformed request, since the protocol expects the URI to immediately follow the method. Thanks for your quick response. Wade Oberpriller StorageTek 612-424-1538 oberpwd@network.com >Unformatted: [In order for any reply to be added to the PR database, you need] [to include in the Cc line and make sure the] [subject line starts with the report component and number, with ] [or without any 'Re:' prefixes (such as "general/1098:" or ] ["Re: general/1098:"). If the subject doesn't match this ] [pattern, your message will be misfiled and ignored. The ] ["apbugs" address is not added to the Cc line of messages from ] [the database automatically because of the potential for mail ] [loops. If you do not include this Cc, your reply may be ig- ] [nored unless you are responding to an explicit request from a ] [developer. Reply only with text; DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS! ]