FULL PRODUCT VERSION :
A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM :
REOPENINGJDK-8080659
Details regarding steps to reproduce and actual/expected result can be found in the closed issueJDK-8080659
The bug was closed with the following reason:
"The spec doesn't appear to commit to ordering these fields. 2015-05-11"
I don't agree with this comment because the specification RFC2616 says that the order matters.
From http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec4.html#sec4.2:
"Multiple message-header fields with the same field-name MAY be present in a message if and only if the entire field-value for that header field is defined as a comma-separated list [i.e., #(values)]. It MUST be possible to combine the multiple header fields into one "field-name: field-value" pair, without changing the semantics of the message, by appending each subsequent field-value to the first, each separated by a comma. The order in which header fields with the same field-name are received is therefore significant to the interpretation of the combined field value, and thus a proxy MUST NOT change the order of these field values when a message is forwarded. "
REPRODUCIBILITY :
This bug can be reproduced always.
A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM :
REOPENING
Details regarding steps to reproduce and actual/expected result can be found in the closed issue
The bug was closed with the following reason:
"The spec doesn't appear to commit to ordering these fields. 2015-05-11"
I don't agree with this comment because the specification RFC2616 says that the order matters.
From http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec4.html#sec4.2:
"Multiple message-header fields with the same field-name MAY be present in a message if and only if the entire field-value for that header field is defined as a comma-separated list [i.e., #(values)]. It MUST be possible to combine the multiple header fields into one "field-name: field-value" pair, without changing the semantics of the message, by appending each subsequent field-value to the first, each separated by a comma. The order in which header fields with the same field-name are received is therefore significant to the interpretation of the combined field value, and thus a proxy MUST NOT change the order of these field values when a message is forwarded. "
REPRODUCIBILITY :
This bug can be reproduced always.
- csr for
-
JDK-8252456 HttpURLConnection.getHeaderFields and URLConnection.getRequestProperties methods return field values in reverse order
-
- Closed
-
- duplicates
-
JDK-8080659 HttpURLConnection's getHeaderFields method returns field values in reverse order
-
- Closed
-
