| 4 | | I don't think that's practical. Further, I have noticed at least one other site that suffers from this issue. Is there a technical reason why the length limit should not be increased? It's not defined by the standard (as far as I know), and various HTTP servers allow for headers of lengths 4k, 8k, 16k, and (in one case) 48k. [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/686217/maximum-on-http-header-values citation] |
| | 4 | I don't think that's practical. Further, I have noticed at least one other site that suffers from this issue. Is there a technical reason why the length limit should not be increased? It's not defined by the standard (as far as I know). As noted in the original patch, various HTTP servers allow for headers of lengths 4k, 8k, 16k, and (in one case) 48k. ([https://stackoverflow.com/questions/686217/maximum-on-http-header-values Citation].) |
