Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Assumption about response headers

[Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...>]

On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 1:11 AM, Ivan Johannessen <ijo...@gm...> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>
> wrote:
>>
>> What version did you download?
>>
> I downloaded the 0.6.1 tag and pulled in the changes from the 0.7 branch
> that allowed me to compile without SSL support.

Cool.

>>
>> In the case of the example, I don't think it adds the
>> "follow_redirects" constructor option. I'll dig into it later but can
>> you check whether the response is an HTTP 200 or an HTTP 302?
>>
> The http_client.cpp do follow redirects and the response is a HTTP/1.1
> response with status 200. This issue is by no means a show stopper for me
> but I pointed it out because I believe it is in disagreement of the
> RFC: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.html
> I could not find anything in the RFC that stated that a response without a
> body "should" or "must" contain either headers.
>

That's odd, you don't get a body from the HTTP 200 OK response from
www.google.com?

Conforming HTTP 1.1 servers should use an HTTP 204 No Content response
instead if it doesn't intend to send a body. Although an HTTP 200 OK
should have either a "Content-Length" or "Transfer-Encoding: chunked"
last time I checked.

I'll try to look deeper into this though, thanks for reporting.

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
deanberris.com