Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:51:09 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Paul Saab <paul@mu.org>, Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf files options src/sys/i386/conf NOT Message-ID: <20000628215109.974681CD7@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Message from Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.org> of "Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:15:34 PDT." <20000628141533.C275@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Paul Saab <paul@mu.org> [000628 12:57] wrote: > > Bill Fumerola (billf@chimesnet.com) wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 10:55:03AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > > > > Show me a browser that only issues 0.9 requests and I'll show you > > > > > a browser that wouldn't grok the html on my page even if it did > > > > > respond to 0.9. > > > > > > > > Your home page doesn't determine the standards for HTTP. :-P > > > > > > > > For one thing, if I manually telnet to a host, I'm much more likely > > > > to use a 0.9 request than a 1.0 one because it's fewer characters > > > > to type. Why would anyone use telnet? What if you want to test the > > > > web server on a machine over a remote login connection and don't > > > > have lynx or w3m installed for some reason or another? > > > > 'telnet foo 80\nGET /\n' is easy to type. > > > > > > Well then they don't get the super-sexy performance. Your loss. > > > > I dont see what the arguing is about. Just dont enable it if you dont > > *WANT* it or fix the accept filter to check for what HTTP request it > > is getting. > > Please don't "fix" the current accf_http module, make your own. > > :) > > thanks, > -Alfred FWIW: try this: telnet my.yahoo.com 80 and type GET / <return> and it will not respond until you press return again. Yes, the original yahoo version breaks http 0.9 - but when I asked, we have had exactly *zero* complaints about it. The main problems we have are with things like javascript which is pretty much required for those sites to work effectively. I dare anybody to show me a Javascript-capable browser that makes HTTP 0.9 requests. ;-) Fixing this would require a third state in the filter: 1: seen "GET " (if not, hand it over to accept()) 2: it is a HTTP/1.x request (if not, hand it over to accept()) 3: wait for end-of-header Incidently, I think it is probably worthwhile to add the HTTP/1.x check - or we will suffer if/when HTTP/2.0 comes out and if and they change the request format and apache adds support. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000628215109.974681CD7>