IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6266 (5383)

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> Tue, 12 June 2018 13:55 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 312A7130E27 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 06:55:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.752
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.752 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=greenbytes.de header.b=YpoEcE1D; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=greenbytes.de header.b=tZKYKXAZ
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 X-MOb5FWVBvr for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 06:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (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 2CF83130E35 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 06:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1fSjjB-00046V-Hp for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:52:53 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:52:53 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1fSjjB-00046V-Hp@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>) id 1fSjj7-00045s-Dl for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:52:49 +0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de ([217.91.35.233]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>) id 1fSjj4-0007Nm-Hy for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:52:48 +0000
Received: by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix, from userid 117) id 9A56415A3382; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:52:24 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1528811544; bh=YBFGXP9J9fkRFX+UcezHVfMqmmrXYZzWnxblO1Y1b8w=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=YpoEcE1DNXnupKFDBvRm0piRr1sV34YOotzI4xqWVdcVJjlK0tkpuwvl1C1ghe16j DcHg8xTG/5b468rTSqHkFRUuE+/Z26hod2qKtPo6vZDIZZ3vyjmGxtpZIw7b8JtQxG 6Ay+bBnVbFYNIN1ec+W7aeAMFXFygXgx4cUf8qj4=
Received: from [192.168.178.20] (unknown [93.217.84.246]) (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 DEF4615A088E; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:52:22 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1528811543; bh=YBFGXP9J9fkRFX+UcezHVfMqmmrXYZzWnxblO1Y1b8w=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=tZKYKXAZanT7NAEXOBlA6nETgtUV+zryAgJjXkrs3wmz+yIuNaLzLTMdBrIWELgZo 74VDjjECrX/Adfe2ZzQsfzzi7RVfpVeurheetoV1QaSJD+lgsgPRdipaUx1A1k6R/4 VQh6YuNOUvWreMFyryxn6JTDa6/Ly0LDchgdyXEw=
To: Magnar Myrtveit <magnar@myrtveit.com>
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, pmcmanus@mozilla.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <20180607130307.8B911B828C3@rfc-editor.org> <9d18a338-3379-6cd5-4390-3441964f7dbb@greenbytes.de> <CAP0Or3j1HY+DtGiTRpR2z1772heikGgW9pQhVaH2U61dUyyC9g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Message-ID: <fbc07ded-6b72-ede7-d3a1-38cadfa51935@greenbytes.de>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:52:21 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAP0Or3j1HY+DtGiTRpR2z1772heikGgW9pQhVaH2U61dUyyC9g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.278, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1fSjj4-0007Nm-Hy 27ee69395e91f1816dfe35bc68862fe5
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6266 (5383)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/fbc07ded-6b72-ede7-d3a1-38cadfa51935@greenbytes.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/35539
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>

On 2018-06-12 15:48, Magnar Myrtveit wrote:
> Thanks for your reply, Julian.
> 
> I agree with both of your reasons, but I still don't think the erratum 
> should be rejected. For example when creating a parser for the 
> Content-Disposition header field, it is important to know what one can 
> expect. Currently, one cannot assume an ext-value to follow ext-token 
> "=". It might just as well be a value. My guess is that this is not the 
> intention, and it makes creating future-proof parsers harder. Having a 
> validated erratum clarifying the issue would be nice.

Well, in general you can't assume that. The extended syntax is currently 
defined only for "filename", and any new parameter using the extended 
syntax would need to be defined in a document extending RFC 6266. So 
yes, you can't handle parameters in a generic way which haven't been 
defined yet.

> By the way, you may update the erratum field "Name" to "Magnar Ovedal 
> Myrtveit". I mistook it as erratum title, rather than my own name :)

The RFC-Editor might be able to do that.

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email