[Technical Errata Reported] RFC7231 (5541)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Fri, 02 November 2018 17:05 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A450126DBF for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 10:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.651
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rtQZBrpB2Tkl for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 10:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [IPv6:2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 574071252B7 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 10:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1gIcqa-0006Eq-O6 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2018 17:03:00 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2018 17:03:00 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1gIcqa-0006Eq-O6@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4c]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1gIcqY-0006DL-L0 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2018 17:02:58 +0000
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([4.31.198.49]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1gIcqX-0008HO-0p for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2018 17:02:58 +0000
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id E4142B810E2; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 10:02:22 -0700 (PDT)
To: fielding@gbiv.com, julian.reschke@greenbytes.de, ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, mnot@mnot.net, patrick.ducksong@gmail.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: rfc7231@vocumsineratio.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20181102170222.E4142B810E2@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2018 10:02:22 -0700
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.985, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1gIcqX-0008HO-0p ce27c89788228a0d360c99c2f5418e98
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7231 (5541)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/20181102170222.E4142B810E2@rfc-editor.org>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/36006
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7231, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5541 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Danil Suits <rfc7231@vocumsineratio.com> Section: 4.3.5 Original Text ------------- If a DELETE request passes through a cache that has one or more stored responses for the effective request URI, those stored responses will be invalidated Corrected Text -------------- If a successful DELETE request passes through a cache that has one or more stored responses for the effective request URI, those stored responses will be invalidated Notes ----- RFC 7234 4.4 describes the semantics of cache invalidation for successful requests (non-error status code), but does not describe semantics for unsuccessful requests. The corrected text parallels the construction in section 4.3.4 ("If a successful PUT request..."). 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. -------------------------------------- RFC7231 (draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-26) -------------------------------------- Title : Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content Publication Date : June 2014 Author(s) : R. Fielding, Ed., J. Reschke, Ed. Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis APP Area : Applications Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7231 (5541) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7231 (5541) Mark Nottingham