Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189)
Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> Thu, 27 November 2014 07:25 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F2111A88A1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 23:25:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.612
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.612 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MANGLED_MEN=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 Cjmf7Uxaj6RE for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 23:25:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78DE01A888C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 23:25:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XttO7-00019P-3j for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 07:21:15 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 07:21:15 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XttO7-00019P-3j@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>) id 1XttNq-00016z-F6 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 07:20:58 +0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de ([217.91.35.233]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>) id 1XttNp-0006HE-9k for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 07:20:58 +0000
Received: from [192.168.2.160] (unknown [93.217.126.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D56015A0114; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 08:20:34 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <5476D0BC.70905@greenbytes.de>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 08:20:28 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, fielding@gbiv.com, barryleiba@computer.org, presnick@qti.qualcomm.com, mnot@mnot.net
CC: simon.schueppel@googlemail.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <20141126195639.B3D5C181CE7@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20141126195639.B3D5C181CE7@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.91.35.233; envelope-from=julian.reschke@greenbytes.de; helo=mail.greenbytes.de
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.162, BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1XttNp-0006HE-9k e98cbade9c0f712614bb28b300fb6221
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/5476D0BC.70905@greenbytes.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/28179
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>
Hi there,
I agree that there is indeed a problem ("the specified field-value rule
does not allow single field-vchar surrounded by whitespace anywhere.
I'm however not sure that the proposed fix is what we want. In
particular, it's not clear why we need to modify the header-field
production at all.
Best regards, Julian
On 2014-11-26 20:56, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7230,
> "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7230&eid=4189
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Simon Schueppel <simon.schueppel@googlemail.com>
>
> Section: 3.2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> header-field = field-name ":" OWS field-value OWS
>
> field-name = token
> field-value = *( field-content / obs-fold )
> field-content = field-vchar [ 1*( SP / HTAB ) field-vchar ]
> field-vchar = VCHAR / obs-text
>
> obs-fold = CRLF 1*( SP / HTAB )
> ; obsolete line folding
> ; see Section 3.2.4
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> header-field = field-name ":" FWS field-value FWS
>
> field-name = token
> FWS = field-ows
> field-value = [ field-vchar *( field-ows field-vchar ) ]
> field-vchar = VCHAR / obs-text
> field-ows = *( SP / HTAB ) *obs-fold
>
> obs-fold = CRLF 1*( SP / HTAB )
> ; obsolete line folding
> ; see Section 3.2.4
>
> Notes
> -----
> the field-value rule given in Section 3.2 will not recognize several strings recognized by specific header rules.
>
> Examples:
> - ", , ," recognized by legacy list rule
> - "abrowser/0.001 (C O M M E N T)" recognized by User-Agent rule
> - "gzip , chunked" recognized by Transfer-Encoding rule
> - etc.
>
> General Problem:
> the specified field-value rule does not allow single field-vchar surrounded by whitespace anywhere
>
> Further Notes:
> -what the authors propably wanted to say:
> a string of octets is a field-value if, and only if:
> -it is *( field-vchar / SP / HTAB / obs-fold )
> -if it is not empty, it starts and ends with field-vchar
>
> -the suggested correction was designed according to these criteria
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC7230 (draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-26)
> --------------------------------------
> Title : Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing
> Publication Date : June 2014
> Author(s) : R. Fielding, Ed., J. Reschke, Ed.
> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis
> Area : Applications
> Stream : IETF
> Verifying Party : IESG
>
--
<green/>bytes GmbH, Hafenweg 16, D-48155 Münster, Germany
Amtsgericht Münster: HRB5782
- [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Julian Reschke
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Zhong Yu
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Barry Leiba
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Roy T. Fielding
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Barry Leiba
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Zhong Yu
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Barry Leiba
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Julian Reschke
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Julian Reschke
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Julian Reschke
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Amos Jeffries
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Zhong Yu
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Zhong Yu
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Willy Tarreau
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Zhong Yu
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Barry Leiba
- [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC7230 (4189) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Willy Tarreau
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Walter H.
- Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189) Julian Reschke