Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189)
Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com> Fri, 28 November 2014 03:29 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 7926C1A19F7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 19:29:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.712
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.712 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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 TAOyW9g_bNrJ for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 19:29:17 -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 48A491A19F8 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 19:29:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XuCBx-0005KC-6a for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 03:25:57 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 03:25:57 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XuCBx-0005KC-6a@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>) id 1XuCBi-0005HQ-FX for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 03:25:42 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com ([209.85.214.175]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>) id 1XuCBh-0008Ac-6x for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 03:25:42 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id wp4so4525396obc.34 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 19:25:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dNWF2e7WQxhvlcJggbHvvCb5Kxy1kLIuKdjG65Nl1N4=; b=0H8dKqHsemg9rNqasQPHzRJwofIKkz3MKL8aRbQmlYJmq+jmq5LXxDSmJDz37UsKgi Nw6Smh1b+p5xXpoAUN+UsKim7xcHW+CAHkkWA7EjsF6LlnD/vvGgAv1xoVUkoM1++FTk P5bGwEpX67XmivTTBgTC0l9DqTEkNDCuhYuSIAeYG9Y+iUcPwt8ggoiCNMt+3VPEVh9U 2agOkPJfDGBNKbV4gQe+GeP3kEzh0dWbSHyBJwTAC/T82OVaxbrW+yvgSeSG5oMzPILJ Q0E5NttqCFYEIEVvITJ3/Jyhx4Z6lgd+eKk/MMesJyhHJe295HfIpWDYS+54/w7NlbUP 51sA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.209.36 with SMTP id mj4mr25932150obc.12.1417145115424; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 19:25:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.76.156.69 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 19:25:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5476D0BC.70905@greenbytes.de>
References: <20141126195639.B3D5C181CE7@rfc-editor.org> <5476D0BC.70905@greenbytes.de>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 21:25:15 -0600
Message-ID: <CACuKZqGuYCsjJPQ8qv2wOz7XS-DSi6iSiGywt1sM14W-EnxTFA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.175; envelope-from=zhong.j.yu@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f175.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.720, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1XuCBh-0008Ac-6x 96480672d554017bbb6c1af0697082ae
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4189)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CACuKZqGuYCsjJPQ8qv2wOz7XS-DSi6iSiGywt1sM14W-EnxTFA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/28185
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>
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Julian Reschke
<julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> wrote:
> 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.
The new rule excludes leading/trailing obs-fold from field-value as
well. It's equivalent to
header-field = field-name ":" OWS *obs-fold field-value OWS *obs-fold
The proposed text seems correct to me.
Zhong Yu
http://bayou.io
>
> 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