>"Larry Masinter" <masinter at parc.xerox.com> wrote:
>>> Many http server implementors seem to have interpreted the combination
>> of these requirements to imply that a POST request without a
>> Content-Length HTTP header cannot have a message-body.
>>This implication might have held for HTTP/1.0, but is wrong for HTTP/1.1.
>Good!
>> Indeed, I have tried several commercial web servers and
>> in all cases, a servlet or CGI program gets end-of-file as soon as it
>> tries to read the message-body input stream for a POST request with
>> chunked transfer-coding.
>>Did these servers purport to support HTTP/1.1 for CGI scripts?
>http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/Forum/Reports/ is a survey of
>implementations, but we didn't ask implementations to distinguish
>whether they supported 'chunked' transfer encoding specifically.
>Yes. BTW, if I send "OPTIONS * HTTP/1.1" and get back an HTTP/1.1
response, does that count as purporting to support HTTP/1.1?
>In any case, you left out the most obvious solution: don't use 'CGI'
>to implement IPP.
>Unfortunately the same problem occurs for servlets.
>However, it would be useful to update CGI for HTTP/1.1.
>>Larry
>>>
-Carl