You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to apache-bugdb@apache.org by Marc Slemko <ma...@znep.com> on 1999/10/26 18:10:02 UTC

Re: protocol/5196: Server response missing Header for 400 Bad Request (fwd)

The following reply was made to PR protocol/5196; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Marc Slemko <ma...@znep.com>
To: Apache bugs database <ap...@apache.org>
Cc:  Subject: Re: protocol/5196: Server response missing Header for 400 Bad Request
 (fwd)
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 08:52:22 -0600 (MDT)

 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
 Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 09:09:09 -0500 (CDT)
 From: Wade D. Oberpriller <ob...@anubis.network.com>
 To: marc@apache.org
 Subject: Re: protocol/5196: Server response missing Header for 400 Bad Request

 Good point.  Yes that makes sense now, and I agree that is the "correct" way to handle that type of malformed request, since the protocol expects the URI to immediately follow the method.

 Thanks for your quick response.

 Wade Oberpriller
 StorageTek
 612-424-1538
 oberpwd@network.com