IETF Logo Mail Archive

[apps-discuss] parameter syntax, was: draft-freed-media-type-regs-01 comments

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Sun, 06 November 2011 14:12 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFAB121F84B5 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 06:12:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.476
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.476 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.877, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N9gogcmm88jb for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 06:12:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8495E21F84BB for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 06:12:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Nov 2011 14:12:34 -0000
Received: from p5DCCB7E7.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [93.204.183.231] by mail.gmx.net (mp020) with SMTP; 06 Nov 2011 15:12:34 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+sD/d8WU2si5AmIPFmVTzGR/6cZ3BHofa8N6xsHW udSdIXO+91ROXP
Message-ID: <4EB695CC.2010509@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 15:12:28 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
References: <01O827GOAJG200XBUL@mauve.mrochek.com> <4EB68E47.5010807@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4EB68E47.5010807@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: "happiana@ietf.org" <happiana@ietf.org>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: [apps-discuss] parameter syntax, was: draft-freed-media-type-regs-01 comments
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 14:12:46 -0000

On 2011-11-06 14:40, Julian Reschke wrote:
> ...
> - 4.2 - reg-name; it would be good to state how exactly it is more
> restrictive, to reference the actual subsection of 2045 (5.1), and maybe
> say why.
> ...

So this is the same as in RFC 4288, and the difference between 2045 and 
4288 appears to be:

RFC2045.token: "!" / "#" / "$" / "%" / "&" / "'" / "*" / "+" / "-" / "." 
/ DIGIT / ALPHA / "^" / "_" / "`" / "{" / "|" / "}" / "~"

RFC4288.reg-name: "!" / "#" / "$" / "&" / "+" / "-" / "." / DIGIT / 
ALPHA / "^" / "_"

RFC2045.token - RFC4288.reg-name: "%" / "'" / "*" / "`" / "{" / "|" / 
"}" / "~"

HTTP has:

RFC2616.token: "!" / "#" / "$" / "%" / "&" / "'" / "*" / "+" / "-" / "." 
/ DIGIT / ALPHA / "^" / "_" / "`" / "|" / "~"

which is somewhere in between 2045 and 4288.

If HTTPbis adds recommendations for header field parameters, should we 
restrict the character repertoire accordingly?


Best regards, Julian

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status