Re: About that Host: header....
Ari Luotonen (luotonen@netscape.com)
Mon, 18 Mar 1996 22:39:58 -0800 (PST)
> #2 (Full URL) may give server admins a real incentive to
> switch over quickly--the impulse to jealously guard bandwidth
> can be powerful.
>
> I may have to run a 1.0 and 1.1 server simultaneously on separate
> IP addresses for a while, but I don't think it would take long to
> switch over with that kind of incentive.
Please be realistic -- full HTTP/1.1 support in a server can't be done
overnight -- and the spec is much less tolerant about non-fully
compliant servers this time. Hence -- you won't necessarily have your
favorite HTTP/1.1 server available the moment there is a HTTP/1.1
client around, and you have bug reports flowing in because your server
is 'broken' for the new 1.1 client.
In any case -- whether the host is in the URL or the Host: header is a
mere matter of taste. One of them breaks things, the other doesn't --
so which one do we pick?
Cheers,
--
Ari Luotonen ari@netscape.com
Netscape Communications Corp. http://home.netscape.com/people/ari/
685 East Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA 94043, USA Netscape Server Development Team