Re: RFC2068 question : is Content-Type mandatory ?
Ian Holsman <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.apache.mod-proxy |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
FWIW we are successfully reverse proxying BEA weblogic servers (5.1) the only hiccup we have is that we require HTTP/1.0 with no keepalives for it to work Graham Leggett wrote: > Peter Van Biesen wrote: > >> I've run into a webserver ( www.bea.com ) that does not send the >> Content-Type headerline back. Default behaviour of the proxy code is to >> add "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1". However, this will >> render the page in plaintext in stead of html. > > > This behaviour is in the Apache core, not the proxy code. > >> I've read the rfc but I'm not entirely sure, as I understand it, if you >> send content back, Content-Type and Content-Encoding are mandatory, no ? >> Anyway, if not, I'd vote to not add the text/plain line and just send >> the page on to the browser without a Content-Type field. > > > According to RFC2616, in the event of a missing content type, the > application can either try intelligently guess the content type by > looking at the content, or it should fall back to > application/octet-stream. > > Apache however specifies a directive DefaultType for what the default > content-type should be should one not be specified, and this directive > defaults to text/plain, which in theory violates the RFC. Changing > this to text/html will work around the problem. > > BTW: The RFC you should be looking at is RFC2616, not RFC2068, which > is obsolete. > > Regards, > Graham