Difference between revisions of "BoshIssues"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
22 bytes removed ,  12:50, 19 October 2012
m
(→‎'Content-Type' HTTP Header: added explanation)
Line 111: Line 111:
clients might need that header, in constrained network environments lack of a content-type header might result in blocking the request. (In section 7 XEP-0124 a little more is said about this). So omitting the header by default might have unwanted results. At the same time the 'SHOULD' in both XEP-0124 and RFC2616 leave room to omit the header when there are good reasons to so, e.g. in a deployment with very limited bandwidth. So the best solution would be: ''don't change XEP-0124.''
clients might need that header, in constrained network environments lack of a content-type header might result in blocking the request. (In section 7 XEP-0124 a little more is said about this). So omitting the header by default might have unwanted results. At the same time the 'SHOULD' in both XEP-0124 and RFC2616 leave room to omit the header when there are good reasons to so, e.g. in a deployment with very limited bandwidth. So the best solution would be: ''don't change XEP-0124.''


===Status===don't change XEP-0124.
===Status===
More discussion needed.
More discussion needed.


71

edits

Navigation menu