Subject: Re: TCP: orphans broken by RFC 2525 #2.17

From: Rick Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 13:08:13 -0700

Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Herbert,
> 
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 04:02:22PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
>>Willy Tarreau <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>>>Looking more closely, I noticed that in traces showing the issue,
>>>the client was sending an additional CRLF after the data in a
>>>separate packet (permitted eventhough not recommended).
>>
>>Where is this permitted? RFC2616 says:
>>
>>	Certain buggy HTTP/1.0 client implementations generate
>>	extra CRLF's after a POST request. To restate what is
>>	explicitly forbidden by the BNF, an HTTP/1.1 client MUST
>>	NOT preface or follow a request with an extra CRLF. 
> 
> 
> And the paragraph just before says :
> 
>    In the interest of robustness, servers SHOULD ignore any empty
>    line(s) received where a Request-Line is expected. In other words, if
>    the server is reading the protocol stream at the beginning of a
>    message and receives a CRLF first, it should ignore the CRLF.

It is the HTTP server code being addressed there, not the underlying TCP stack 
is it not?

rick jones