Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7234 (4616)
Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 09 February 2016 00:12 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0011B3DF3 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 16:12:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 xk5fZm79eBxj for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 16:12:08 -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 D2D541B3D81 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 16:11:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1aSvre-0008Q8-Ll for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:09:06 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:09:06 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1aSvre-0008Q8-Ll@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1aSvra-0008PM-BF for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:09:02 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1aSvrX-0001Cp-89 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:09:01 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (unknown [120.149.194.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5980D22E261; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 19:08:25 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <20160209000555.AEDDA18046A@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:08:22 +1100
Cc: Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, barryleiba@computer.org, me@brianchang.info, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <95C7BA04-69C1-474D-B79E-7993269EEACD@mnot.net>
References: <20160209000555.AEDDA18046A@rfc-editor.org>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
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=-8.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.359, 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: maggie.w3.org 1aSvrX-0001Cp-89 87238b02b5b9bb34742a47e556953ee1
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7234 (4616)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/95C7BA04-69C1-474D-B79E-7993269EEACD@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31054
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>
4.2.2 explains "cacheable by default" in the context of HTTP caching. > On 9 Feb 2016, at 11:05 am, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7234, > "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7234&eid=4616 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Editorial > Reported by: Brian Chang <me@brianchang.info> > > Section: GLOBAL > > Original Text > ------------- > (See Section 3.2 for additional details related to the use of public in > response to a request containing Authorization, and Section 3 for > details of how public affects responses that would normally not be > stored, due to their status codes not being defined as cacheable > by default; see Section 4.2.2.) > > has a status code that is defined as cacheable by default > (see Section 4.2.2), or > > Corrected Text > -------------- > (See Section 3.2 for additional details related to the use of public in > response to a request containing Authorization, and Section 3 for > details of how public affects responses that would normally not be > stored, due to their status codes not being defined as cacheable > by default; see Section 6.1 of [RFC7231].) > > has a status code that is defined as cacheable by default > (see Section 6.1 of [RFC7231]), or > > Notes > ----- > Section 4.2.2 is titled "Calculating Heuristic Freshness" but is referenced in the original text when talking about status codes. This is confusing despite having a reference to Section 6.1 of RFC7231 buried within the text. > > There are other references to 4.2.2 as well, but those actually talk about heuristic freshness. > > 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. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC7234 (draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-26) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching > Publication Date : June 2014 > Author(s) : R. Fielding, Ed., M. Nottingham, 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/
- [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7234 (4616) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7234 (4616) Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7234 (4616) Mark Nottingham