homeWork
BohdanTask 1.
Done!
Task 2.
Response Headers
CONNECTION
Control options for the current connection and list of hop-by-hop response fields.
CONTENT-RANGE
Where in a full body message this partial message belongs
CONTENT-ENCODING
The type of encoding used on the data
DATE
The date and time that the message was sent (in “HTTP-date” format as defined by RFC 7231)
SERVER
A name for the server
Request Headers
ACCEPT
The media type/types acceptable
ACCEPT-ENCODING
List of acceptable encodings
ACCEPT-LANGUAGE
List of acceptable languages
CONNECTION
Control options for the current connection. Accepts keep-alive and close
HOST
The domain name of the server (used to determined the server with virtual hosting), and the TCP port number on which the server is listening. If the port is omitted, 80 is assumed. This is a mandatory HTTP request header
REFERER
The address of the previous web page from which a link to the currently requested page was followed.
Task 3.
HTTP 1.0 vs 1.1
HTTP 1.0 could only define up to 16 status codes which was a reserved number. The main limitation of using the 16 status codes was that there was poor resolution reporting that was noticed and thus there was the need to come up with the HTTP 1.1. HTTP 1.1 came with 24 status codes that were able to solve the previous limitations that HTTP 1.1 faced. Error reporting was done faster and there was easy detection of errors when they occurred.
Another plus that came with use of the HTTP 1.1 was the warning header that had the capability of carrying out multiple number of secondary status alerts. The main aim of the secondary status indications in HTTP 1.1 was to bring notice to the recipient of a problem when a successful request was made. The warning requests that were instituted in HTTP1.1 could be divided into two classes. The classes were based on the first digit that was presented on the three digit code. In one class, there was deletion of the warning upon successful validation of the code into the cache. The second class was one that was retained and it comes with a revalidated entry of the cache.
HTTP 1.0 use comes with only allowance for the basic authentication with this facing a challenge of user names and passwords that are used being unencrypted. This as you would rightly suppose brings forth the factor of risk of being snooped upon. HTTP 1.0 also does not have dependencies and thus the information collected by the activity of snooping can be used later in the future. The coming of HTTP 1.1 did correct the issue, offering the use of Digest Access Authentication. This mirrors basic authentication and allows for servers top make use of a onetime value which in effect make snooping quite difficult to achieve. A checksum of the password, username and one time value is made and these are all encrypted. You can thus rest assured that no snooping is possible when using HTTP 1.1.
HTTP 1.0 design needed a new TCP connection for every request that was made through it. This caused a challenge as there was the cost and time of setting up a new TCP connection with every request, making the connection very slow. To deal with this HTTP1.1 came up with the use of persistent connections and also the use of pipeline requests to work on the persistent connections.
Get vs. Post
GET and POST
Two common methods for the request-response between a server and client are:
- GET- It requests the data from a specified resource
- POST- It submits the processed data to a specified resource
POST method is used:
Task 4.
Task 5.
I used sorting by name for fast search item that I need. I've used filter "png" to find files of certain resolution.
Task 6.
Task 7.
Task 8.
The HEAD method is identical to GET except that the server MUST NOT return a message-body in the response. The metainformation contained in the HTTP headers in response to a HEAD request SHOULD be identical to the information sent in response to a GET request. This method can be used for obtaining metainformation about the entity implied by the request without transferring the entity-body itself. This method is often used for testing hypertext links for validity, accessibility, and recent modification.
Task 9.
Task 10.
