Thank you, Stuart.

I do have a related question: should a 304 response set a Content-Length: 0? Don't think so, right?

Today, Undertow set a content-length of 0 on 304 responses.

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas@redhat.com> wrote:
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@gmail.com>
> To: undertow-dev@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@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev



--
edgar