Home/ Questions/Q 7667683
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-31T15:10:09+00:00

I am setting up video delivery for video files to tv set-top boxes. I

  • 0

I am setting up video delivery for video files to tv set-top boxes.
I want to use Amazon Cloudfront.
The video files are requested as usual http requets that may contain a range header to request partial resources (to enable the user on the box to jump into any position within the video).

My problem is that it is working on 2 of 3 boxes, one makes problems.

The request looks like this (sample data):

GET /path/file.mp4 HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: My User Agent
Host:myhost.com
Accept:*/*
Range: bytes=100-200

So if I do a request to cloudfront using telnet I see that the response is HTTP 1.0:

joe@flimmit-joe:~$ telnet d2zf9fl0izzsf6.cloudfront.net 80
Trying 216.137.61.164...
Connected to d2zf9fl0izzsf6.cloudfront.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET /skin/frontend/default/flimmit/images/headerbanners/02_green.png HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: My User Agent
Host:d2zf9fl0izzsf6.cloudfront.net
Accept:*/*
Range: bytes=100-200

HTTP/1.0 206 Partial Content
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:42:15 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.16 (Ubuntu)
Last-Modified: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 10:37:54 GMT
ETag: "1e0b8a-2d2b-4a8f6863ac11a"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Cache-Control: max-age=2592000
Expires: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:42:15 GMT
Content-Type: image/png
Age: 351213
Content-Range: bytes 100-200/11563
Content-Length: 101
X-Cache: Hit from cloudfront
X-Amz-Cf-Id: W2fzPeBSWb8_Ha_UzvIepZH-Z9xibXyRddoHslJZ3TDXyFfjwE3UMQ==,CwiKc8-JGfE77KBVTTOyE9g-OYf7P-bCJZEWGwef9Es5rzhUBYKE8A==
Via: 1.0 972e3ba2f91fd0a38ea062d0cc03be37.cloudfront.net (CloudFront)
Connection: close

q�]#��ĥM�oӘ�i��i��������Y�.��/��ib���&
���
�Ⱦ�00�>�����Y`��X���r���s�=�n�s�b���7MConnection closed by foreign host.
joe@flimmit-joe:~$

Unfortunately I have only limited access to the box for testing purposes.
However this behavior by cloud-front seems strange to me so I wanted to ask whether it is even valid.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    It is absolutely “valid” to answer with Http 1.0 to an Http 1.1 request.

    I’ll cite the Appendix 19.6 to the RFC2068 “It is beyond the scope of a protocol specification to mandate compliance with previous versions. HTTP/1.1 was deliberately designed, however, to make supporting previous versions easy.”

    http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec19.html#sec19.6

    The important part is basically that the RFC does not force an Http 1.1 answer, so it’s up to the server.

    • 0