Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7234 (6377)

[Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>]

There seems to be something wrong here -- either a tools problem, or some copy-paste spam. Could rfc-editor@ please look into it?

Cheers,

> On 2 Jan 2021, at 3:42 pm, RFC Errata System <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7234,
> "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6377
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: MR JUSTAS KUKSTA <[e-mail]>
> 
> Section: 7234
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> {"type":"https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-6.5.4","title":"Not Found","status":404,"traceId":"00-ef45f92788e3f5489612f478de970e86-3c0f03f4a62afc41-00"}
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> Status: Verified (1)
> RFC 7234, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching", June 2014
> Source of RFC: httpbis (app)
> Errata ID: 4674
> Status: Verified
> Type: Editorial
> Publication Format(s) : TEXT
> Reported By: Vasiliy Faronov
> Date Reported: 2016-04-21
> Verifier Name: Alexey Melnikov
> Date Verified: 2016-04-26
> Section 5.4 says:
> 
>   When sending a no-cache request, a client ought to include both the
>   pragma and cache-control directives, unless Cache-Control: no-cache
>   is purposefully omitted to target other Cache-Control response
>                                                         ^^^^^^^^
>   directives at HTTP/1.1 caches.
> It should say:
> 
>   When sending a no-cache request, a client ought to include both the
>   pragma and cache-control directives, unless Cache-Control: no-cache
>   is purposefully omitted to target other Cache-Control request
>                                                         ^^^^^^^
>   directives at HTTP/1.1 caches.
> Notes:
> 
> "other Cache-Control response directives" was probably intended to be "other Cache-Control request directives," because a request cannot have response directives.
> 
> Status: Reported (1)
> RFC 7234, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching", June 2014
> Source of RFC: httpbis (app)
> Errata ID: 6279
> Status: Reported
> Type: Technical
> Publication Format(s) : TEXT
> Reported By: Todd Greer
> Date Reported: 2020-09-04
> Section 4.2.4 says:
> 
> A cache MUST NOT generate a stale response if it is prohibited by an
> explicit in-protocol directive (e.g., by a "no-store" or "no-cache"
> cache directive, a "must-revalidate" cache-response-directive, or an
> applicable "s-maxage" or "proxy-revalidate" cache-response-directive;
> see Section 5.2.2).
> 
> 
> It should say:
> 
> A cache MUST NOT generate a stale response if it is prohibited by an
> explicit in-protocol directive (e.g., by a "no-cache"
> cache directive, a "must-revalidate" cache-response-directive, or an
> applicable "s-maxage" or "proxy-revalidate" cache-response-directive;
> see Section 5.2.2).
> Notes:
> 
> The examples of directives that prohibit stale responses includes "no-store", but the definitions of "no-store" in 5.2.1.5 and 5.2.2.3 don't prohibit serving stale responses, and there is no other mention in RFC 7234 (or elsewhere) of "no-store" prohibiting serving stale responses.
> 
> If a "no-store" request directive is intended to prohibit serving stale responses, 5.2.1.5 should say so. (The question is meaningless for "no-store" response directives, since those should never be found in a cache.)
> 
> Status: Rejected (3)
> RFC 7234, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching", June 2014
> Source of RFC: httpbis (app)
> Errata ID: 5564
> Status: Rejected
> Type: Technical
> Publication Format(s) : TEXT
> Reported By: Bruce Adams
> Date Reported: 2018-11-27
> Rejected by: Alexey Melnikov
> Date Rejected: 2019-03-25
> Section 4.2.4 says:
> 
> A cache MUST NOT send stale responses unless it is disconnected
>   (i.e., it cannot contact the origin server or otherwise find a
>   forward path) or doing so is explicitly allowed (e.g., by the
>   max-stale request directive; see Section 5.2.1).
> It should say:
> 
> A cache SHOULD NOT send stale responses unless it is disconnected
>   (i.e., it cannot contact the origin server or otherwise find a
>   forward path) or doing so is explicitly allowed (e.g., by the
>   max-stale request directive; see Section 5.2.1).
> 
> A cache MAY send stale responses if a cache-control extension for
> stale content such as "stale-while-revalidate" is used 
> (see RFC5861).
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Notes:
> 
> The original text seems to conflict with https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5861#section-3
> 
> 3. The stale-while-revalidate Cache-Control Extension
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC7234 (draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-26)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching
> Publication Date    : June 2014
> Author(s)           : R. Fielding, Ed., M. Nottingham, Ed., J. Reschke, Ed.
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis APP
> Area                : Applications
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/