Question regarding RFC 7230

"Hartford, Eric" <hartbeat@amazon.com> Sat, 07 January 2017 20:21 UTC

Resent-Message-Id: <E1cPxRC-0002vV-Gn@frink.w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5FD77E09-8875-4845-960D-B56332B14788"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: "Hartford, Eric" <hartbeat@amazon.com>
Resent-From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:01:13 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2017 21:17:45 +0100
Resent-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <9F52BB0C-85FB-40EB-B5F8-6C6F91346A25@contoso.com>
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Question regarding RFC 7230
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/9F52BB0C-85FB-40EB-B5F8-6C6F91346A25@contoso.com>
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list

I have a few questions I was hoping to clarify.
 
Is a GET request allowed to have a body?  (the spec seems to say “yes”)
RFC 7230 3.3 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3.3>
The presence of a message body in a request is signaled by a
Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header field.  Request message
framing is independent of method semantics, even if the method does
not define any use for a message body.
 
Is the server allowed to look at the body in a GET request?  (debatable)
RFC 7231 4.3.1 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-4.3.1>
A payload within a GET request message has no defined semantics;
sending a payload body on a GET request might cause some existing
implementations to reject the request.

Question regarding RFC 7230 Hartford, Eric
Re: Question regarding RFC 7230 Julian Reschke
Re: Question regarding RFC 7230 Julian Reschke
Re: Question regarding RFC 7230 James M Snell