Re: [undertow-dev] transfer-encoding vs content-length with small response

This is indeed a bug, however it should have been fixed as part of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/UNDERTOW-180. Looking at the code it appears that AsyncSenderImpl also has this issue, I will fix it up (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/UNDERTOW-385). Stuart ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Edgar Espina" <espina.edgar(a)gmail.com&gt; > To: undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Tuesday, 10 February, 2015 10:36:20 PM > Subject: [undertow-dev] transfer-encoding vs content-length with small response > > Hi, > > I know that Undertow figure it out a content-length or transfer-encoding > header when none of them was set. That's good and it works as expected. > > It seems to be a problem when you explicitly set the "Transfer-Encoding" > header bc Undertow, still add the Content-Length (on small responses?) but > it doesn't remove the Transfer-Encoding header. > > On such cases, the response contains both headers, which I think it's wrong, > no? > > -- > edgar > > _______________________________________________ > undertow-dev mailing list > undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev