Should SM_User: populate HTTP_SM_USER?
- From: mvaneerde@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 25 Apr 2006 15:10:01 GMT
There's a rather spirited discussion between me and David Wang of the
Microsoft IIS team going on here:
http://tinyurl.com/gpdyr
http://blogs.msdn.com/david.wang/archive/2006/04/20/HOWTO_Retrieve_Request_Headers_using_ISAPI_ASP_and_ASP_Net.aspx
To boil it down, the question is this:
Given a request with header
SM_User: foo
.... and with NO SM-User: header...
Should the CGI environment variable HTTP_SM_USER expand to "foo"?
I'm under the impression that it should. However, IIS does not, and
David is trying to defend IIS's behavior by saying that the spec is not
clear.
What do you think? Is the spec clear? Is IIS's behavior correct?
Operationally, this question is of little import as IIS (since version
6) does populate the non-standard HEADER_SM_USER variable to "foo".
--
PLEASE NOTE: comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi is a
SELF-MODERATED newsgroup. aa.net and boutell.com are
NOT the originators of the articles and are NOT responsible
for their content.
HOW TO POST to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi:
http://www.thinkspot.net/ciwac/howtopost.html
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should SM_User: populate HTTP_SM_USER?
- From: A. Sinan Unur
- Re: Should SM_User: populate HTTP_SM_USER?
- Prev by Date: Re: Regex - Domain from URL & Match to eMail
- Next by Date: Re: Regex - Domain from URL & Match to eMail
- Previous by thread: Regex - Domain from URL & Match to eMail
- Next by thread: Re: Should SM_User: populate HTTP_SM_USER?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading