Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4779)
Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 19 August 2016 23:05 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 7FBE512D0C2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:05:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.168
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.168 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 It5soSP5V_Sg for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:05:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D858012B056 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:05:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1basnE-0005WS-6J for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 23:01:40 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 23:01:40 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1basnE-0005WS-6J@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1basn7-0005SP-5g for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 23:01:33 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1basn5-0001no-DZ for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 23:01:32 +0000
Received: from [192.168.3.104] (unknown [124.189.98.244]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1257B22E1F3; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 19:01:00 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <EF08ABC7-F23D-4EDC-BCF4-3A9562A14132@gbiv.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 09:00:57 +1000
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, pmcmanus@mozilla.com, wrowe@rowe-clan.net, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <75768668-446B-4677-8D06-CB1D954304B4@mnot.net>
References: <20160818094247.84BAFB812C2@rfc-editor.org> <01274D7C-1424-4549-B32C-96B6F091FD56@mnot.net> <EF08ABC7-F23D-4EDC-BCF4-3A9562A14132@gbiv.com>
To: Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.351, BAYES_00=-1.9, 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_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1basn5-0001no-DZ 55afb6033eb0f6f6a4a6a0266bf5d6fb
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4779)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/75768668-446B-4677-8D06-CB1D954304B4@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32334
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>
Fair enough. REJECT. > On 20 Aug 2016, at 2:25 AM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote: > >> On Aug 18, 2016, at 8:21 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: >> >> This seems like an editorial improvement; the current text is reasonably clear (especially since this is just a summary of changes, not normative text). >> >> HOLD FOR UPDATE, I think. > > Isn't that pointless? I mean, the entire section should be removed on the > next update. > > The existing text is correct in relation to the change from 2616. Making > it more specific would have been better, but that doesn't qualify as errata. > > ....Roy > >> >> Cheers, >> >>> On 18 Aug 2016, at 7:42 PM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> 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=4779 >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Type: Editorial >>> Reported by: William A. Rowe Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> >>> >>> Section: A.2. >>> >>> Original Text >>> ------------- >>> [...] Non-US-ASCII content in header fields and the reason >>> phrase has been obsoleted and made opaque (the TEXT rule was >>> removed). (Section 3.2.6) >>> >>> Corrected Text >>> -------------- >>> [...] Non-US-ASCII content in header field values and the reason >>> phrase has been obsoleted and made opaque (the TEXT rule was >>> removed). (Section 3.2.6) >>> >>> Notes >>> ----- >>> Section 3.2 plainly states header field names are token >>> (VCHARs less separators) as defined in 3.2.6. >>> >>> The "header fields" identified in this footnote are neither >>> clear nor correct. >>> >>> 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 APP >>> Area : Applications >>> Stream : IETF >>> Verifying Party : IESG >>> >> >> -- >> Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >> > > -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4779) Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4779) Roy T. Fielding
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4779) Mark Nottingham
- [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7230 (4779) RFC Errata System
- [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC7230 (4779) RFC Errata System