Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 21:05:07 +0100 (CET) From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Per Kristian Hove <perhov@phys.ntnu.no>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, Andrew McNaughton <andrew@squiz.co.nz> Subject: Re: pkhttpd (Was: Would this make FreeBSD more secure?) Message-ID: <XFMail.981120210507.asmodai@wxs.nl> In-Reply-To: <199811201926.LAA18418@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20-Nov-98 Matthew Dillon wrote: >:The 1.1 extensions are less important for simple web servers, but are >:important if you're setting up a proxy server. > > 1.1 is fairly important for both, because not only does 1.1 hack, er, > 'fix' > the persistent connection protocol, it also requires the Host: header (1) > so as clients conform to 1.1, the server is guarenteed the ability to > determine the virtual host from the Host: header rather then having to > assign unique IP's to each virtual host. > > note(1): the server is required to return a failure code if the client > says it is using HTTP/1.1 but does not supply a Host: mime header. OK, that's all cute ;) But how big would a fully functional HTTP 1.0 or 1.1 compliant server be? Because for embedded systems (read picoBSD) we need to make such decisions and based on the results implement them. *digs out the RFC specs...* --- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven/Asmodai asmodai(at)wxs.nl | Cum angelis et pueris, Junior Network/Security Specialist | fideles inveniamur *BSD & picoBSD: The Power to Serve... <http://www.freebsd.org>; To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.981120210507.asmodai>