LISTSERV 16.5 - XROOTD-DEV Archives

I think Paul gave a good overview in his comment above: #1707 (comment)

Basically, the RFC is unfortunately vague in this area but practical experience has shown that unsupported digests are best ignored (this is quite helpful in rolling out new digest algorithms for example) instead of an error. I believe that if only unsupported digests are requested, it's probably best to return a default (adler32 in your example above).

The current behavior of returning an invalid digest (unknown) but with a HTTP 200 status is probably the least desirable option.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/1707#issuecomment-1377316370", "url": "https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/1707#issuecomment-1377316370", "name": "View Issue" }, "description": "View this Issue on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]

Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1