[Technical Errata Reported] RFC9110 (7109)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 31 August 2022 16:54 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 []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A0F8C15A73A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.959
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.959 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TfPLns4woiyZ for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:54:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org []) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B62D4C15C53C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1oTQv1-00G1u7-3C for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:50:23 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:50:23 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1oTQv1-00G1u7-3C@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>) id 1oTQv0-00G1tA-01 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:50:22 +0000
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([] helo=rfcpa.amsl.com) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>) id 1oTQuy-008ESF-5p for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:50:21 +0000
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 27C7EC884E; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:50:07 -0700 (PDT)
To: fielding@gbiv.com, mnot@mnot.net, julian.reschke@greenbytes.de, superuser@gmail.com, francesca.palombini@ericsson.com, mnot@mnot.net, tpauly@apple.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: gary.wilson@gmail.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20220831165007.27C7EC884E@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:50:07 -0700
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=; envelope-from=wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com; helo=rfcpa.amsl.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1oTQuy-008ESF-5p 87c235d1e3efe81adc2c37645258b177
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9110 (7109)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/20220831165007.27C7EC884E@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/40364
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 RFC9110,
"HTTP Semantics".

You may review the report below and at:

Type: Technical
Reported by: Gary Wilson Jr. <gary.wilson@gmail.com>

Section: 15.4.9

Original Text
   The 308 (Permanent Redirect) status code indicates that the target
   resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any future
   references to this resource ought to use one of the enclosed URIs.

Corrected Text
   The 308 (Permanent Redirect) status code indicates that the target
   resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any future
   references to this resource ought to use one of the enclosed URIs.
   The user agent MUST NOT change the request method if it performs
   an automatic redirection to that URI.

and/or add note as is present in RFC 7538, e.g.:

      Note: This status code is similar to 301 (Moved Permanently)
      (Section 15.4.2), except that it does not allow changing
      the request method from POST to GET.

The current text in this section for 308 Permanent Redirect does not include any mention of the user agent not changing the request method. I am suggesting that similar wording be used as in 15.4.8.  307 Temporary Redirect and/or a note added similar to the one present in RFC 7538 but excluded from this section's current text. Whichever is chosen, it would be good to make the wording/notes consistent across both the 307 and 308 status code sections.

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. 

RFC9110 (draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics-19)
Title               : HTTP Semantics
Publication Date    : June 2022
Author(s)           : R. Fielding, Ed., M. Nottingham, Ed., J. Reschke, Ed.
Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
Source              : HTTP
Area                : Applications and Real-Time
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG