[Technical Errata Reported] RFC7231 (5806)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 12 August 2019 21:09 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 2696912085F for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 14:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.651
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ZM5vceyTyB8o for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 14:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
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 08CD01210E0 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1hx041-0001kZ-9a for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 02:28:01 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 02:28:01 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1hx041-0001kZ-9a@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4c]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1hx03w-0001jl-OF for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 02:27:56 +0000
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([4.31.198.49]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1hx03v-0005Ab-7u for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 02:27:56 +0000
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 63FF7B8132E; Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:27:30 -0700 (PDT)
To: fielding@gbiv.com, julian.reschke@greenbytes.de, ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, mnot@mnot.net, patrick.ducksong@gmail.com, tpauly@apple.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: andersk@mit.edu, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Message-Id: <20190812022730.63FF7B8132E@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 19:27:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=4.31.198.49; envelope-from=wwwrun@rfc-editor.org; helo=rfc-editor.org
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.079, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1hx03v-0005Ab-7u 368c9514aa002291b602be08d5c4f7fc
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7231 (5806)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/20190812022730.63FF7B8132E@rfc-editor.org>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/36969
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 RFC7231,
"Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5806

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu>;

Section: 4.3.7

Original Text
-------------
A server MUST generate a Content-Length field with a value of "0" if no
payload body is to be sent in the response.

Corrected Text
--------------
If no payload body is to be sent in the response, a server MUST
generate a status code of 204 (No Content) or a Content-Length field
with a value of "0" (but not both).

Notes
-----
The original text contradicts RFC 7230 §3.3.2: “A server MUST NOT send a Content-Length header field in any response with a status code of 1xx (Informational) or 204 (No Content)”, unless the intention was to disallow all 204 responses to OPTIONS requests, which I assume it was not.

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  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC7231 (draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-26)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content
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