p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Sat, 20 April 2013 08:41 UTC

Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:41:32 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UTTMS-0003IV-8K@frink.w3.org>
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6EAF151D-EBE7-456D-B5D1-A35933CCDCF8@mnot.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:41:01 +1000
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.183; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-08.mxes.net
Subject: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/6EAF151D-EBE7-456D-B5D1-A35933CCDCF8@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list

p2 4.3.2 says:

    Aside from the payload header fields (Section 3.3), the server SHOULD send the same header fields in response to a HEAD request as it would have sent if the request had been a GET.

The payload header fields include Content-Length, which in my testing is pretty common in HEAD responses. Was this an oversight, or intentional?

(We already have an exception for HEAD responses in p1's message body length algorithm, section 3.3.3).


--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Mark Nottingham
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Willy Tarreau
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Mark Nottingham
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Willy Tarreau
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Mark Nottingham
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Zhong Yu
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Mark Nottingham
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Mark Nottingham
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Julian Reschke
Re: p2: Content-Length in HEAD responses Willy Tarreau