Is it safe to use HTTP status 308 Permanent Redirect?IIS logs show sc-win32-status=64 but only through some networksSome apache log questionsWhen redirecting a mobile browser to a m.domain.com subdomain, what status code should I return?IIS7 and HTTP status code handlingnginx: rewrite URL but have original URL stored in access.log as 200.htaccess rewrite http to https results in loopMalformed nginx 307 redirect response?POST request is repeated with nginx loadbalanced server (status 499)Is it bad to redirect http to https?Unable to get Nginx/Apache + FastCGI + PHP-FPM + HTTP/1.0 to use Keep-Alive
Paid for article while in US on F-1 visa?
Client team has low performances and low technical skills: we always fix their work and now they stop collaborate with us. How to solve?
Has there ever been an airliner design involving reducing generator load by installing solar panels?
Why is consensus so controversial in Britain?
Is it tax fraud for an individual to declare non-taxable revenue as taxable income? (US tax laws)
What would happen to a modern skyscraper if it rains micro blackholes?
Why "Having chlorophyll without photosynthesis is actually very dangerous" and "like living with a bomb"?
Why is 150k or 200k jobs considered good when there's 300k+ births a month?
Do I have a twin with permutated remainders?
Accidentally leaked the solution to an assignment, what to do now? (I'm the prof)
Why are electrically insulating heatsinks so rare? Is it just cost?
Languages that we cannot (dis)prove to be Context-Free
Java Casting: Java 11 throws LambdaConversionException while 1.8 does not
Is it inappropriate for a student to attend their mentor's dissertation defense?
infared filters v nd
Malformed Address '10.10.21.08/24', must be X.X.X.X/NN or
When a company launches a new product do they "come out" with a new product or do they "come up" with a new product?
Does an object always see its latest internal state irrespective of thread?
Cross compiling for RPi - error while loading shared libraries
How is the claim "I am in New York only if I am in America" the same as "If I am in New York, then I am in America?
Does detail obscure or enhance action?
Approximately how much travel time was saved by the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869?
Which country benefited the most from UN Security Council vetoes?
RSA: Danger of using p to create q
Is it safe to use HTTP status 308 Permanent Redirect?
IIS logs show sc-win32-status=64 but only through some networksSome apache log questionsWhen redirecting a mobile browser to a m.domain.com subdomain, what status code should I return?IIS7 and HTTP status code handlingnginx: rewrite URL but have original URL stored in access.log as 200.htaccess rewrite http to https results in loopMalformed nginx 307 redirect response?POST request is repeated with nginx loadbalanced server (status 499)Is it bad to redirect http to https?Unable to get Nginx/Apache + FastCGI + PHP-FPM + HTTP/1.0 to use Keep-Alive
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
Is it safe to use the HTTP status code 308 Permanent Redirect (suggestion) in server responses? The issue with 301 Moved Permanently is that it only works with GET requests (to be fair: POST will transform to GET which is NOT an option).
The status code is very newish in "RFC time" so what would you suggest?
What would a browser do if its not aware of 308? Would it find the location and do 302?
http http-status-code
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
|
show 2 more comments
Is it safe to use the HTTP status code 308 Permanent Redirect (suggestion) in server responses? The issue with 301 Moved Permanently is that it only works with GET requests (to be fair: POST will transform to GET which is NOT an option).
The status code is very newish in "RFC time" so what would you suggest?
What would a browser do if its not aware of 308? Would it find the location and do 302?
http http-status-code
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
Newer even than you seem to realize; it's an RFC now.
– Michael Hampton♦
Jul 3 '14 at 14:01
1
Did you read the Deployment Considerations section?
– Håkan Lindqvist
Jul 3 '14 at 14:02
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
– Chris S
Jul 3 '14 at 14:03
1
Under what scenario would you expect to receive a POST request sent directly to an outdated URL?
– Skyhawk
Jul 3 '14 at 14:25
1
@Skyhawk : I work with offline features “of“ html5. For comments or creating new posts the target url may have changed due to modification to the post itself out its categories.
– burnersk
Jul 8 '14 at 20:08
|
show 2 more comments
Is it safe to use the HTTP status code 308 Permanent Redirect (suggestion) in server responses? The issue with 301 Moved Permanently is that it only works with GET requests (to be fair: POST will transform to GET which is NOT an option).
The status code is very newish in "RFC time" so what would you suggest?
What would a browser do if its not aware of 308? Would it find the location and do 302?
http http-status-code
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
Is it safe to use the HTTP status code 308 Permanent Redirect (suggestion) in server responses? The issue with 301 Moved Permanently is that it only works with GET requests (to be fair: POST will transform to GET which is NOT an option).
The status code is very newish in "RFC time" so what would you suggest?
What would a browser do if its not aware of 308? Would it find the location and do 302?
http http-status-code
http http-status-code
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
asked Jul 3 '14 at 13:59
burnerskburnersk
78521634
78521634
Newer even than you seem to realize; it's an RFC now.
– Michael Hampton♦
Jul 3 '14 at 14:01
1
Did you read the Deployment Considerations section?
– Håkan Lindqvist
Jul 3 '14 at 14:02
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
– Chris S
Jul 3 '14 at 14:03
1
Under what scenario would you expect to receive a POST request sent directly to an outdated URL?
– Skyhawk
Jul 3 '14 at 14:25
1
@Skyhawk : I work with offline features “of“ html5. For comments or creating new posts the target url may have changed due to modification to the post itself out its categories.
– burnersk
Jul 8 '14 at 20:08
|
show 2 more comments
Newer even than you seem to realize; it's an RFC now.
– Michael Hampton♦
Jul 3 '14 at 14:01
1
Did you read the Deployment Considerations section?
– Håkan Lindqvist
Jul 3 '14 at 14:02
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
– Chris S
Jul 3 '14 at 14:03
1
Under what scenario would you expect to receive a POST request sent directly to an outdated URL?
– Skyhawk
Jul 3 '14 at 14:25
1
@Skyhawk : I work with offline features “of“ html5. For comments or creating new posts the target url may have changed due to modification to the post itself out its categories.
– burnersk
Jul 8 '14 at 20:08
Newer even than you seem to realize; it's an RFC now.
– Michael Hampton♦
Jul 3 '14 at 14:01
Newer even than you seem to realize; it's an RFC now.
– Michael Hampton♦
Jul 3 '14 at 14:01
1
1
Did you read the Deployment Considerations section?
– Håkan Lindqvist
Jul 3 '14 at 14:02
Did you read the Deployment Considerations section?
– Håkan Lindqvist
Jul 3 '14 at 14:02
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
– Chris S
Jul 3 '14 at 14:03
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
– Chris S
Jul 3 '14 at 14:03
1
1
Under what scenario would you expect to receive a POST request sent directly to an outdated URL?
– Skyhawk
Jul 3 '14 at 14:25
Under what scenario would you expect to receive a POST request sent directly to an outdated URL?
– Skyhawk
Jul 3 '14 at 14:25
1
1
@Skyhawk : I work with offline features “of“ html5. For comments or creating new posts the target url may have changed due to modification to the post itself out its categories.
– burnersk
Jul 8 '14 at 20:08
@Skyhawk : I work with offline features “of“ html5. For comments or creating new posts the target url may have changed due to modification to the post itself out its categories.
– burnersk
Jul 8 '14 at 20:08
|
show 2 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
Although 308 is now a standard (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7538), it is not currently Safe [Edit] (as of 3 April 2019), especially for desktop applications, but may be almost safe in some specific regions (e.g. India), or for applications targeted at tablets and mobile devices.
The lack of safety is because IE 11 on Windows 7 and 8.1 does not support it. In IE 11 the site just appears to hang. Luckily the IE that ships with Windows 10 does support it, so it will be just a case of waiting until the general populous moves on from Windows 7 (Win 7 has only just been surpassed by Win 10 in global usage stats, Win 8 is significantly less popular than both) [Edit] or your company makes a decision to no longer support it (which you can make a very strong case for from 14th January 2020 when Windows 7 loses even long term support).
All other modern browsers support it (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera).
[Edit] Usage stats from March 2019 to help make your decision:
- 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7
- 9.83% of desktop users were on IE; as Win10 pushed Edge so much, I'd assume most of these users to be on Win 7. Ref netmarketshare
So, a decision to use 308 would affect probably (my guesstimate based on above stats) between 5 and 9% of desktop users as of this edit (3/4/2019). If your application is geared more towards tablets/mobile devices, this value will be significantly lower. Similarly if your app is specifically for the Indian market.
You can test if your browser supports 308 redirects here: https://webdbg.com/test/308/
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
Note that this is different from 307. IE 11 on Windows 7 supports HTTP 307 without issue. (Why?)
– Franklin Yu
Aug 7 '18 at 19:09
add a comment |
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308
The RFC 7538 proposal have wide support today. It's safe.
308 instead 301. 307 instead 302.
move != redirect
Move reminds a specific address and/or file moved. Redirect is a new location or address.
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
1
As of now (20 Feb 2018) it is not yet safe due to the number of people on Windows 7 using IE 11 which still does not support this.
– monty
Feb 19 '18 at 20:53
@monty what was that number? what is it now?
– Robin Winslow
Mar 30 at 14:18
As of March 2019, 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7, and 9.83% of desktop users were on IE.
– monty
Apr 2 at 23:47
add a comment |
To end this: No it is not safe to use that status code. See comments for details.
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
Some browsers just fail completely on that status code.
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
1
This answer is out of date. I believe the RFC has been and accepted available for use across modern browsers developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308 . However, if you require support from older browsers, this may still be an issue!
– Yahya Uddin
Mar 9 '17 at 17:13
3
It does not work in IE11 on Win8.1 and lower (it works on Win10).
– Bart Verkoeijen
Aug 8 '17 at 8:24
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f609872%2fis-it-safe-to-use-http-status-308-permanent-redirect%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Although 308 is now a standard (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7538), it is not currently Safe [Edit] (as of 3 April 2019), especially for desktop applications, but may be almost safe in some specific regions (e.g. India), or for applications targeted at tablets and mobile devices.
The lack of safety is because IE 11 on Windows 7 and 8.1 does not support it. In IE 11 the site just appears to hang. Luckily the IE that ships with Windows 10 does support it, so it will be just a case of waiting until the general populous moves on from Windows 7 (Win 7 has only just been surpassed by Win 10 in global usage stats, Win 8 is significantly less popular than both) [Edit] or your company makes a decision to no longer support it (which you can make a very strong case for from 14th January 2020 when Windows 7 loses even long term support).
All other modern browsers support it (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera).
[Edit] Usage stats from March 2019 to help make your decision:
- 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7
- 9.83% of desktop users were on IE; as Win10 pushed Edge so much, I'd assume most of these users to be on Win 7. Ref netmarketshare
So, a decision to use 308 would affect probably (my guesstimate based on above stats) between 5 and 9% of desktop users as of this edit (3/4/2019). If your application is geared more towards tablets/mobile devices, this value will be significantly lower. Similarly if your app is specifically for the Indian market.
You can test if your browser supports 308 redirects here: https://webdbg.com/test/308/
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
Note that this is different from 307. IE 11 on Windows 7 supports HTTP 307 without issue. (Why?)
– Franklin Yu
Aug 7 '18 at 19:09
add a comment |
Although 308 is now a standard (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7538), it is not currently Safe [Edit] (as of 3 April 2019), especially for desktop applications, but may be almost safe in some specific regions (e.g. India), or for applications targeted at tablets and mobile devices.
The lack of safety is because IE 11 on Windows 7 and 8.1 does not support it. In IE 11 the site just appears to hang. Luckily the IE that ships with Windows 10 does support it, so it will be just a case of waiting until the general populous moves on from Windows 7 (Win 7 has only just been surpassed by Win 10 in global usage stats, Win 8 is significantly less popular than both) [Edit] or your company makes a decision to no longer support it (which you can make a very strong case for from 14th January 2020 when Windows 7 loses even long term support).
All other modern browsers support it (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera).
[Edit] Usage stats from March 2019 to help make your decision:
- 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7
- 9.83% of desktop users were on IE; as Win10 pushed Edge so much, I'd assume most of these users to be on Win 7. Ref netmarketshare
So, a decision to use 308 would affect probably (my guesstimate based on above stats) between 5 and 9% of desktop users as of this edit (3/4/2019). If your application is geared more towards tablets/mobile devices, this value will be significantly lower. Similarly if your app is specifically for the Indian market.
You can test if your browser supports 308 redirects here: https://webdbg.com/test/308/
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
Note that this is different from 307. IE 11 on Windows 7 supports HTTP 307 without issue. (Why?)
– Franklin Yu
Aug 7 '18 at 19:09
add a comment |
Although 308 is now a standard (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7538), it is not currently Safe [Edit] (as of 3 April 2019), especially for desktop applications, but may be almost safe in some specific regions (e.g. India), or for applications targeted at tablets and mobile devices.
The lack of safety is because IE 11 on Windows 7 and 8.1 does not support it. In IE 11 the site just appears to hang. Luckily the IE that ships with Windows 10 does support it, so it will be just a case of waiting until the general populous moves on from Windows 7 (Win 7 has only just been surpassed by Win 10 in global usage stats, Win 8 is significantly less popular than both) [Edit] or your company makes a decision to no longer support it (which you can make a very strong case for from 14th January 2020 when Windows 7 loses even long term support).
All other modern browsers support it (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera).
[Edit] Usage stats from March 2019 to help make your decision:
- 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7
- 9.83% of desktop users were on IE; as Win10 pushed Edge so much, I'd assume most of these users to be on Win 7. Ref netmarketshare
So, a decision to use 308 would affect probably (my guesstimate based on above stats) between 5 and 9% of desktop users as of this edit (3/4/2019). If your application is geared more towards tablets/mobile devices, this value will be significantly lower. Similarly if your app is specifically for the Indian market.
You can test if your browser supports 308 redirects here: https://webdbg.com/test/308/
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
Although 308 is now a standard (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7538), it is not currently Safe [Edit] (as of 3 April 2019), especially for desktop applications, but may be almost safe in some specific regions (e.g. India), or for applications targeted at tablets and mobile devices.
The lack of safety is because IE 11 on Windows 7 and 8.1 does not support it. In IE 11 the site just appears to hang. Luckily the IE that ships with Windows 10 does support it, so it will be just a case of waiting until the general populous moves on from Windows 7 (Win 7 has only just been surpassed by Win 10 in global usage stats, Win 8 is significantly less popular than both) [Edit] or your company makes a decision to no longer support it (which you can make a very strong case for from 14th January 2020 when Windows 7 loses even long term support).
All other modern browsers support it (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera).
[Edit] Usage stats from March 2019 to help make your decision:
- 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7
- 9.83% of desktop users were on IE; as Win10 pushed Edge so much, I'd assume most of these users to be on Win 7. Ref netmarketshare
So, a decision to use 308 would affect probably (my guesstimate based on above stats) between 5 and 9% of desktop users as of this edit (3/4/2019). If your application is geared more towards tablets/mobile devices, this value will be significantly lower. Similarly if your app is specifically for the Indian market.
You can test if your browser supports 308 redirects here: https://webdbg.com/test/308/
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
edited Apr 3 at 0:00
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
answered Feb 19 '18 at 21:11
montymonty
1565
1565
Note that this is different from 307. IE 11 on Windows 7 supports HTTP 307 without issue. (Why?)
– Franklin Yu
Aug 7 '18 at 19:09
add a comment |
Note that this is different from 307. IE 11 on Windows 7 supports HTTP 307 without issue. (Why?)
– Franklin Yu
Aug 7 '18 at 19:09
Note that this is different from 307. IE 11 on Windows 7 supports HTTP 307 without issue. (Why?)
– Franklin Yu
Aug 7 '18 at 19:09
Note that this is different from 307. IE 11 on Windows 7 supports HTTP 307 without issue. (Why?)
– Franklin Yu
Aug 7 '18 at 19:09
add a comment |
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308
The RFC 7538 proposal have wide support today. It's safe.
308 instead 301. 307 instead 302.
move != redirect
Move reminds a specific address and/or file moved. Redirect is a new location or address.
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
1
As of now (20 Feb 2018) it is not yet safe due to the number of people on Windows 7 using IE 11 which still does not support this.
– monty
Feb 19 '18 at 20:53
@monty what was that number? what is it now?
– Robin Winslow
Mar 30 at 14:18
As of March 2019, 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7, and 9.83% of desktop users were on IE.
– monty
Apr 2 at 23:47
add a comment |
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308
The RFC 7538 proposal have wide support today. It's safe.
308 instead 301. 307 instead 302.
move != redirect
Move reminds a specific address and/or file moved. Redirect is a new location or address.
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
1
As of now (20 Feb 2018) it is not yet safe due to the number of people on Windows 7 using IE 11 which still does not support this.
– monty
Feb 19 '18 at 20:53
@monty what was that number? what is it now?
– Robin Winslow
Mar 30 at 14:18
As of March 2019, 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7, and 9.83% of desktop users were on IE.
– monty
Apr 2 at 23:47
add a comment |
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308
The RFC 7538 proposal have wide support today. It's safe.
308 instead 301. 307 instead 302.
move != redirect
Move reminds a specific address and/or file moved. Redirect is a new location or address.
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308
The RFC 7538 proposal have wide support today. It's safe.
308 instead 301. 307 instead 302.
move != redirect
Move reminds a specific address and/or file moved. Redirect is a new location or address.
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
answered Feb 5 '17 at 5:06
perroudperroud
7111
7111
1
As of now (20 Feb 2018) it is not yet safe due to the number of people on Windows 7 using IE 11 which still does not support this.
– monty
Feb 19 '18 at 20:53
@monty what was that number? what is it now?
– Robin Winslow
Mar 30 at 14:18
As of March 2019, 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7, and 9.83% of desktop users were on IE.
– monty
Apr 2 at 23:47
add a comment |
1
As of now (20 Feb 2018) it is not yet safe due to the number of people on Windows 7 using IE 11 which still does not support this.
– monty
Feb 19 '18 at 20:53
@monty what was that number? what is it now?
– Robin Winslow
Mar 30 at 14:18
As of March 2019, 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7, and 9.83% of desktop users were on IE.
– monty
Apr 2 at 23:47
1
1
As of now (20 Feb 2018) it is not yet safe due to the number of people on Windows 7 using IE 11 which still does not support this.
– monty
Feb 19 '18 at 20:53
As of now (20 Feb 2018) it is not yet safe due to the number of people on Windows 7 using IE 11 which still does not support this.
– monty
Feb 19 '18 at 20:53
@monty what was that number? what is it now?
– Robin Winslow
Mar 30 at 14:18
@monty what was that number? what is it now?
– Robin Winslow
Mar 30 at 14:18
As of March 2019, 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7, and 9.83% of desktop users were on IE.
– monty
Apr 2 at 23:47
As of March 2019, 36.52% of desktop users are still on Windows 7, and 9.83% of desktop users were on IE.
– monty
Apr 2 at 23:47
add a comment |
To end this: No it is not safe to use that status code. See comments for details.
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
Some browsers just fail completely on that status code.
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
1
This answer is out of date. I believe the RFC has been and accepted available for use across modern browsers developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308 . However, if you require support from older browsers, this may still be an issue!
– Yahya Uddin
Mar 9 '17 at 17:13
3
It does not work in IE11 on Win8.1 and lower (it works on Win10).
– Bart Verkoeijen
Aug 8 '17 at 8:24
add a comment |
To end this: No it is not safe to use that status code. See comments for details.
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
Some browsers just fail completely on that status code.
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
1
This answer is out of date. I believe the RFC has been and accepted available for use across modern browsers developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308 . However, if you require support from older browsers, this may still be an issue!
– Yahya Uddin
Mar 9 '17 at 17:13
3
It does not work in IE11 on Win8.1 and lower (it works on Win10).
– Bart Verkoeijen
Aug 8 '17 at 8:24
add a comment |
To end this: No it is not safe to use that status code. See comments for details.
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
Some browsers just fail completely on that status code.
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
To end this: No it is not safe to use that status code. See comments for details.
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
Some browsers just fail completely on that status code.
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
edited Sep 16 '14 at 19:30
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
answered Sep 16 '14 at 18:15
burnerskburnersk
78521634
78521634
1
This answer is out of date. I believe the RFC has been and accepted available for use across modern browsers developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308 . However, if you require support from older browsers, this may still be an issue!
– Yahya Uddin
Mar 9 '17 at 17:13
3
It does not work in IE11 on Win8.1 and lower (it works on Win10).
– Bart Verkoeijen
Aug 8 '17 at 8:24
add a comment |
1
This answer is out of date. I believe the RFC has been and accepted available for use across modern browsers developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308 . However, if you require support from older browsers, this may still be an issue!
– Yahya Uddin
Mar 9 '17 at 17:13
3
It does not work in IE11 on Win8.1 and lower (it works on Win10).
– Bart Verkoeijen
Aug 8 '17 at 8:24
1
1
This answer is out of date. I believe the RFC has been and accepted available for use across modern browsers developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308 . However, if you require support from older browsers, this may still be an issue!
– Yahya Uddin
Mar 9 '17 at 17:13
This answer is out of date. I believe the RFC has been and accepted available for use across modern browsers developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/308 . However, if you require support from older browsers, this may still be an issue!
– Yahya Uddin
Mar 9 '17 at 17:13
3
3
It does not work in IE11 on Win8.1 and lower (it works on Win10).
– Bart Verkoeijen
Aug 8 '17 at 8:24
It does not work in IE11 on Win8.1 and lower (it works on Win10).
– Bart Verkoeijen
Aug 8 '17 at 8:24
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f609872%2fis-it-safe-to-use-http-status-308-permanent-redirect%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Newer even than you seem to realize; it's an RFC now.
– Michael Hampton♦
Jul 3 '14 at 14:01
1
Did you read the Deployment Considerations section?
– Håkan Lindqvist
Jul 3 '14 at 14:02
308 is not a standard - it's a proposal, still in the experimental stage. Browers should fall back to a 300 interpretation of any 301-399 error that they don't specifically understand.
– Chris S
Jul 3 '14 at 14:03
1
Under what scenario would you expect to receive a POST request sent directly to an outdated URL?
– Skyhawk
Jul 3 '14 at 14:25
1
@Skyhawk : I work with offline features “of“ html5. For comments or creating new posts the target url may have changed due to modification to the post itself out its categories.
– burnersk
Jul 8 '14 at 20:08