Amazon Adds New Server Response Header to HTTP Spec
I like it when a major online retailer takes the initiative and extends the existing HTTP specifications.
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:58:58 GMT
Server: Server
x-amz-id-1: 1S269NQQQYFX2DF09G7Z
x-amz-id-2: jiSzL7NRwWiEx7pM/90anU1AW9p9Qts3
Set-cookie: session-id-time=1157698800l; path=/; domain=.amazon.com; expires=Fri Sep 08 07:00:00 2006 GMT
Set-cookie: session-id=002-9480265-0783223; path=/; domain=.amazon.com; expires=Fri Sep 08 07:00:00 2006 GMT
Vary: Accept-Encoding,User-Agent
Content-Encoding: gzip
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
nnCoection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Anyone know what the nnCoection: close header represents?
Technorati Tags: Amazon, HTTP, RFC+2616, Server+headers
This is what I found:
“Missed Cneonctions
This header:
Cneonction: close
and its variant:
nnCoection: close
were two of the headers which first spurred my interest in HTTP headers.
imdb.com, amazon.com, gamespy.com, and google.com have all at various times used these or similar misspellings of connection, and I’m not by any means the first to have noticed. My first thought was that this was just a typo. After more consideration, however, I now believe this is something done by a hackish hardware load balancer trying to “remove†the connection close header when proxying for an internal server. That way, the connection can be held open and images can be transmitted through the same TCP connection, while the backend web server doesn’t need to be modified at all. It just closes the connection and moves on to the next request. ”
(from http://www.nextthing.org/archives/2005/08/07/fun-with-http-headers )
Brent
September 1 2006 at 14:21
This is what I found:”Missed CneonctionsThis header:Cneonction: closeand its variant:nnCoection: closewere two of the headers which first spurred my interest in HTTP headers.imdb.com, amazon.com, gamespy.com, and google.com have all at various times used these or similar misspellings of connection, and I’m not by any means the first to have noticed. My first thought was that this was just a typo. After more consideration, however, I now believe this is something done by a hackish hardware load balancer trying to “remove†the connection close header when proxying for an internal server. That way, the connection can be held open and images can be transmitted through the same TCP connection, while the backend web server doesn’t need to be modified at all. It just closes the connection and moves on to the next request. “(from http://www.nextthing.org/archives/2005/08/07/fu… )
Brent
September 1 2006 at 14:21