Search code examples
c#.netdotnet-httpclient

Explicitly Set Content-Type Headers For Get Operation in HttpClient


Is there a way in which I can explicitly set the Content-Type header values when performing a GET with HttpClient ?

I realise this breaks 1.1 protocol, but I am working with a API that does not conform to it, and REQUIRES I set a Content-Type Header.

I have tried this with to no avail...

using (var httpClient = new HttpClient())
{
   var httpRequestMessage = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Get, "http://example.com");

   httpClient.DefaultRequestHeaders.TryAddWithoutValidation("Content-Type", "application/x-www-form-urlencoded+v1.3");

   await httpClient.SendAsync(httpRequestMessage)
}

I've inspected the DefaultRequestHeaders after the TryAddWithoutValidation is added, and it does not seem to be setting the Content-Type value.

If I try to set the Content-Type of the httpRequestMessage (by setting httpRequestMessage.Content = ..., I get the following error:

Cannot send a content-body with this verb-type.

Is there a way that I can explicitly set the Content-Type for a GET operation using the HttpClient?


Solution

  • Based on my findings i concluded the HttpClient is very restrictive in terms of the protocol rules. I also reflected through the implementation DLL and i couldn't find anything that it would indicate that it allows protocol violations.

    GET requests shouldn't have content-type headers, and the HttpClient is enforcing that rule.

    I think the exception message when you try to set the content-type header is self-descriptive:

    System.InvalidOperationException: Misused header name. Make sure request headers are used with HttpRequestMessage, response headers with HttpResponseMessage, and content headers with HttpContent objects.

    Also if you use set the content body you get one more self-descriptive message:

    System.Net.ProtocolViolationException: Cannot send a content-body with this verb-type.

    Since you are willing to violate HTTP rules for GET requests i am pretty sure your only option is to stick with the less restrictive WebClient, which works in that scenario.