IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7540 (4720)

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 28 July 2016 14:04 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 776DE12D17A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 07:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.208
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 w0IjA3jxSkzF for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 07:04:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA9BC12D58E for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 07:04:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bSlr0-0007Ld-QY for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:00:02 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:00:02 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bSlr0-0007Ld-QY@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1bSlqv-0006CJ-6I for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 13:59:57 +0000
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net ([216.86.168.183]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1bSlqt-0006e5-Bg for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 13:59:56 +0000
Received: from [192.168.154.200] (unknown [74.125.61.136]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00F9850A84; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 09:59:28 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <20160627064625.E9A8FB80D5F@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 15:59:28 +0200
Cc: mike@belshe.com, fenix@google.com, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, ben@nostrum.com, alissa@cooperw.in, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, kazu@iij.ad.jp, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <83C394C7-A6CC-4338-ADFE-0E4132A080CC@mnot.net>
References: <20160627064625.E9A8FB80D5F@rfc-editor.org>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.183; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-08.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1bSlqt-0006e5-Bg 37c622b6036072d837e072b6f0246b43
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7540 (4720)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/83C394C7-A6CC-4338-ADFE-0E4132A080CC@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32067
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: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

I think this is APPROVE.


> On 27 Jun 2016, at 8:46 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7540,
> "Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 2 (HTTP/2)".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7540&eid=4720
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Kazu Yamamoto <kazu@iij.ad.jp>
> 
> Section: 8.2.1
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> Pushed responses are always associated with an explicit request from
> the client.  The PUSH_PROMISE frames sent by the server are sent on
> that explicit request's stream. 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> Promised requests are always associated with an explicit request from
> the client.  The PUSH_PROMISE frames sent by the server are sent on
> that explicit request's stream. 
> 
> Notes
> -----
> This section talks about promised requests, not pushed responses.
> 
> 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 (IESG)
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC7540 (draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-17)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Version 2 (HTTP/2)
> Publication Date    : May 2015
> Author(s)           : M. Belshe, R. Peon, M. Thomson, Ed.
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis APP
> Area                : Applications
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> 

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email