[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Sat, 10 January 2015 02:40 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ietf.org@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 6108A1A6F02 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 18:40:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 iuhIaa1UQvQb for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 18:40:31 -0800 (PST)
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 337561A1A30 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 18:40:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Y9luy-0001pt-3A for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 02:36:48 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 02:36:48 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Y9luy-0001pt-3A@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1Y9luu-0001p8-I0 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 02:36:44 +0000
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([4.31.198.49]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>) id 1Y9lut-0007OF-IQ for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 02:36:44 +0000
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 9A16A181CDC; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 18:35:40 -0800 (PST)
To: fielding@gbiv.com, julian.reschke@greenbytes.de, barryleiba@computer.org, presnick@qti.qualcomm.com, mnot@mnot.net
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 6000:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: bjoern@hoehrmann.de, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Message-Id: <20150110023540.9A16A181CDC@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 18:35:40 -0800
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=-6.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.944, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Y9lut-0007OF-IQ 5f331e2f56ec178be261dc732e5f754e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20150110023540.9A16A181CDC@rfc-editor.org>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/28439
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>
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: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7231&eid=4224 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Bjoern Hoehrmann <bjoern@hoehrmann.de> Section: 4.1 and A. D Original Text ------------- method = token Corrected Text -------------- method = <method, see [RFC7230], Section 3.1.1> Notes ----- The HTTP/1.1 RFCs define rules imported across documents using prose rules for all rules except this one. This is an error because RFC7231 does not mean to re-define the production rule. 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. -------------------------------------- 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 Area : Applications Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224) Julian Reschke
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224) Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224) Julian Reschke
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224) Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224) Julian Reschke
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7231 (4224) Mark Nottingham
- [Errata Rejected] RFC7231 (4224) RFC Errata System
- [Errata Rejected] RFC7231 (4224) RFC Errata System