Re: Few issues with new mod_python.publisher.

[Nicolas Lehuen]

Another remark : has anyone suscribed to redhat, debian etc. mailing list to watch for such patches ? I don't understand why those guys aren't posting their patches on the mod_python mailing list.

Regards,
Nicolas

2005/8/10, Nicolas Lehuen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

This is particularly tricky. I don't know how many app server prevent content from being returned on a HEAD request, but I guess there aren't too many. However, it's a MUST NOT, so it should be prevented.

Maybe mod_python could replace req.write with a NOP function whenever the request method is HEAD ?

Regards,
Nicolas

2005/8/10, Juha-Matti Tapio <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >:

On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 10:08:08PM +1000, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> Okay. What though are the implications of content still being returned
> for a HEAD request. What does the standard say about that?

RFC 2616, 9.4 HEAD

  The HEAD method is identical to GET except that the server MUST NOT return
  a message-body in the response. The metainformation contained in the HTTP
  headers in response to a HEAD request SHOULD be identical to the
  information sent in response to a GET request.

Ok, now that I read the standard again, it seems that the preferable way to
implement this is to somehow prevent the bytes written from being sent.

Though I have no idea how the user agents would react if they did receive
a message body on HEAD.


--
Tmi Juha-Matti Tapio    Puh/Tel. +358-50-5419230
Y-tunnus 1911527-0      Fax      +358-9-34756631

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFC+fDIRGhQc/k/gTsRApwKAKCTo/wpAWbNHW03gmreQNrfedbbqwCfe4nx
/L748xZkfuWksurvYESuFBM=
=FIch
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----