Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01.txt> (CDN Loop Prevention) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2018-12-04 23:21, Mark Nottingham wrote:
Hi Julian,

On 3 Dec 2018, at 1:51 am, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx> wrote:

s/[RFC7230], Section 5.7.1/Section 5.7.1 of [RFC7230]/

   "tracking message forwards, avoiding request loops, and identifying
   the protocol capabilities of senders along the request/response
   chain."
   In theory, Via could be used to identify these loops.  However, in
   practice it is not used in this fashion, because some HTTP servers
   use Via for other purposes - in particular, some implementations
   disable some HTTP/1.1 features when the Via header is present.

It would be nice if this came with pointers to related bug reports so the reader could have a glance.

2.  The CDN-Loop Request Header Field
   CDN-Loop: FooCDN, barcdn; host="foo123.bar.cdn"
   CDN-Loop: baz-cdn; abc="123"; def="456", anotherCDN
   Note that the token syntax does not allow whitespace, DQUOTE or any
   of the characters "(),/:;<=>?@[]{}".  See [RFC7230], Section 3.2.6.

s/.  See [RFC7230], Section 3.2.6./([RFC7230], Section 3.2.6)./

   Likewise, note the rules for when parameter values need to be quoted
   in [RFC7231], Section 3.1.1.

s/[RFC7231], Section 3.1.1/Section 3.1.1 of [RFC7231]/

Is this just personal preference, or is there a reason you suggest this form? I see nothing about it in RFC7322.

In this case it was a personal preference, but note that just because multiple forms are blessed, they work equally well everywhere...

Best regards, Julian






[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux