Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (5964)

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 23 January 2020 22:30 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 9EC941200E9 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 14:30:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.751
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.751 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=lb0LGaZh; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=FFmbONmw
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 cyAkFJoIzRUO for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 14:30:40 -0800 (PST)
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 63E941200C7 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 14:30:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1iukya-0004sU-Re for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 22:29:24 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 22:29:24 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1iukya-0004sU-Re@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4f]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1iukyZ-0004rj-FL for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 22:29:23 +0000
Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.20]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1iukyX-0003zf-GK for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 22:29:23 +0000
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7E566B; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 17:29:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jan 2020 17:29:17 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm1; bh=z CxjhtTXmVav4kRL0gfg8RmsM2jNxVZh4OlQwIV0Y8Q=; b=lb0LGaZharf8qcjqE n5Seo7Bbbe4OyAlVAx9LaWsCEd3TM3K3PA6O+KWVrpNpQ64SUPzA7xvFl1VNX25t avYf5pzK18wl0zFlocDH6WhFyGVsdYOkc8J67jZuZXdJMXEHO4ObJSb4zCLfLlW+ szXiaqvmmcxWtNfCD3gmC6n4ejWiD3SosM/fyga+6UkmQSWgd222yNw9IV/mG/jE 4ftnJLV2TKtG0/D64DB6YDLL97V8yuzSCzkzarGO/iM/R6smbDkSy7/0CtW8+cC1 yqdhUUH3e3gpuY3avsU98xYTJqlJuaj6LFE4SelcbIpymhIUzIDiKkRFWspw+s3c s5+Sg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=zCxjhtTXmVav4kRL0gfg8RmsM2jNxVZh4OlQwIV0Y 8Q=; b=FFmbONmw5kvCY51TlqUPuyafRRc4dpzidhtO9ApVFZ102hEd0GzTlwoYs lqeRQbSsl8/DDI1qrbUyga6pqTmZL9q2Fm4UYo9ntmD+Rq48YL9+Bfc7WaBTDqop H3b3wTPLQxWqwGFPSMJKl9gWKbKH6bXoU/PC+v6eYWGOyl4IK9ZRfP9ntxTLkOlJ SEcoPfPLIosT7u3r5CYkwmEJJq1XeYrPehjNo9I/5ET/N7z59g9QzqhZicJUJbyh 6CcHyWv0++5CtgqOkdY0xEbmLm2vVLJEYKFcoG4OQh9lAwYR8i3psSjeMuhfVca4 L1XC4JGn0on6ziC2a40WjwRfN3c/g==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:Ox4qXsxioYS3jkLeCx6uVw20DEMJX4j7T2CysMj9tC_sj7n1q9KEkg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrvddvgdellecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcu pfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpe hgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdpihhnthgvrhhnvghtfihiuggvrdhorhhgpdhmnhhothdrnhgv thenucfkphepudduledrudejrdduheekrddvhedunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd enucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:Ox4qXrJiXeGAdHJML0rwwEvOtYUit-hfRjsaZ47Uu5z-P6rBNXcamg> <xmx:Ox4qXmKytZZvWvsU1Pcd7IYmO3Y-XVGl04ZT4N0JmFtur1v3OL9-Cw> <xmx:Ox4qXosN40Vg_FE-ayDXy3IBq7ilPdMIGyBFPENAOmtZ9ZBOFgS3oQ> <xmx:PB4qXrzk3Z3yirwsCS8DW8TAVj3GefxaT1qn8sQpcQo8LmUsxz6dHA>
Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 298DE3060AC0; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 17:29:11 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <5E2A1D7A.1030600@openfortress.nl>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 09:29:09 +1100
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, tpauly@apple.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6387E079-ED85-4A3F-BD3F-CA71367BEC0E@mnot.net>
References: <20200123155840.241DDF406CD@rfc-editor.org> <FF06904B-55AC-46C6-A20B-68FF435C98DC@mnot.net> <5E2A1D7A.1030600@openfortress.nl>
To: Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=64.147.123.20; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1iukyX-0003zf-GK f10a5771bfc5d2cf6a45bd0f652b6632
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (5964)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/6387E079-ED85-4A3F-BD3F-CA71367BEC0E@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37273
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>

Hi Rick,

I'm saying that those documents are actively under revision now, so the appropriate place to discuss it is in that effort, not as an erratum against the soon-to-be-obsoleted specification.

Cheers,


> On 24 Jan 2020, at 9:26 am, Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl> wrote:
> 
> Hello Mark,
> 
>> This is better filed as an issue on the HTTP core revisions [1] than as an erratum.
>> Recommending REJECT.
>> 1. https://github.com/httpwg/http-core#draft-http-core-documents
> 
> It is a mixture of technically incorrect application of RFC 3986 and
> suggestions how HTTP should handle this; is what you are saying that
> this is too much a mixture?
> 
> I was not sure how to bring this forward, and still am not sure.  I am
> writing a positive alternative in draft-vanrein-http-unauth-user -- is
> that more in line with your take on this?
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Rick van Rein
> InternetWide.org

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