https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35217
--- Comment #11 from rahul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-26 11:19:26 PST --- (In reply to comment #10) > > Your original bug was that the entry that you posted (Cache-control: > > "xxxx"=blah) was a valid extension directive. > > Not exactly. There were two test cases in the original bug report. The first > case is using the questionable quoted string as the directive name. The second > test case does not. I do not recall claiming that both directives are > perfectly > valid -- I know that one of them is of questionable validity, but that is not > the issue in this bug report. Now, I am confused, could you please specify the request(s), current response and expected response? (The html is long, and I don't think I am looking at the same lines as you are.) (And can I request you to quote it in text format? html is rather hard quote again in threads.) > > But as per the RFC, it is not. > > The question now, is as to what the httpd should do when faced with an > > invalid > > entry. > > That question is possible for the first test case but not for the second. > > And even for the first test case, I would not be surprised if httpd actually > ignores directives it considers invalid. If that is correct, that the first > test case is still good as it illustrates that httpd is not interpreting the > invalid directive as invalid. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
