[hybi] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8491)

"Andrew (andy) Newton" <andy@hxr.us> Wed, 02 July 2025 16:27 UTC

Message-ID: <87df724e-3809-4787-b392-74c2be892ca6@hxr.us>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2025 12:27:11 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Madison Church <mchurch@staff.rfc-editor.org>, Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
References: <20250628151539.170AA26B2D9@rfcpa.rfc-editor.org> <3B85F499-CD43-47E7-93C4-ACB5B917C80C@staff.rfc-editor.org>
Content-Language: en-US
From: "Andrew (andy) Newton" <andy@hxr.us>
In-Reply-To: <3B85F499-CD43-47E7-93C4-ACB5B917C80C@staff.rfc-editor.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID-Hash: MSXTHWQWQAGSD5EMWX3WJ6BNTFIDPICV
CC: samuel871211@gmail.com, RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, ifette+ietf@google.com, Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com, hybi@ietf.org
Precedence: list
Subject: [hybi] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8491)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hybi/pIquxFhE2mbgqCfAI2LbgpHBjrU>

Would websockets be under WIT now?

-andy

On 7/2/25 12:14, Madison Church wrote:
> Hi Andy and Orie,
> 
> We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial, so we changed the Type to “Technical”. As Stream Approvers, please review and set the Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/) Note that this errata report comes from the BiDirectional or Server-Initiated HTTP (hybi) Working Group, which is concluded.
> 
> You may review the report at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8491
> 
> Information on how to verify errata reports can be found at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/how-to-verify/
> 
> Further information on errata can be found at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php
> 
> Thank you,
> RFC Editor/mc
> 
>> On Jun 28, 2025, at 10:15 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>>
>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6455,
>> "The WebSocket Protocol".
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> You may review the report below and at:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid8491
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> Type: Editorial
>> Reported by: YuSheng Chen <samuel871211@gmail.com>
>>
>> Section: section-9.1
>>
>> Original Text
>> -------------
>>    is exactly equivalent to
>>
>>          Sec-WebSocket-Extensions: foo, bar; baz=2
>>
>> Corrected Text
>> --------------
>>    is exactly equivalent to
>>
>>          Sec-WebSocket-Extensions: foo; bar; baz=2
>>
>> Notes
>> -----
>> Should be semicolon-separated
>>
>> Instructions:
>> -------------
>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it
>> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
>> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>
>> --------------------------------------
>> RFC6455 (draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-17)
>> --------------------------------------
>> Title               : The WebSocket Protocol
>> Publication Date    : December 2011
>> Author(s)           : I. Fette, A. Melnikov
>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>> Source              : BiDirectional or Server-Initiated HTTP APP
>> Stream              : IETF
>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>

[hybi] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8491) RFC Errata System
[hybi] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8… Madison Church
[hybi] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8… Andrew (andy) Newton
[hybi] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8… Alexey Melnikov
[hybi] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8… Andrew (andy) Newton
[hybi] Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6455 (8… Mike Bishop