Be really careful with this. While all browsers out there speak http 1.1 by now and thus should support 303 redirects, many proxy servers are still living in ht

Be really careful with this. While all browsers out there speak http 1.1 by now and thus should support 303 redirects, many proxy servers are still living in http 1.0 land. A proxy shouldn't care about a status code in the 300 range, but it might (maybe erroring out on "unknown" codes as part of some security feature). And then there are scripts quickly thrown together using the HTTP libraries of $LANGUAGE. You'd have to check these too if you use them in a context where you'd also use a 303 redirect. For what it's worth: my app is serving pages to users behind the worst possible collections of both enterprise and personal firewalls that seem to mangle HTTP headers at will. Heck, I even have more than 10% IE 5.5 users on one installation. That said, ever since 2004 I have never had one instance of a browser or proxy resubmitting a form in response to a 302 redirect. But many instances of where leaving the trodden path, was causing the strangest unexpected breakages due to severely broken client software. As such, personally, I will stay with what works and what the RFC is admitting to generally work even if it shouldn't, instead of experimenting with semantics for no visible gain what so ever. Sounding bitter? Once you witness AV software altering Content-Encoding headers without altering the encoding, you too would get bitter :-)