W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1996

HTTP 1.1, rev 6 comments

From: Mark Nahabedian <Naha@ai.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 18:09-0400
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: naha@ai.mit.edu
Message-Id: <19960723220941.9.NAHA@FROOSEVELT.AI.MIT.EDU>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/1159
I've been reading the draft HTTP/1.1 specification
(draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-06) and have some comments.

Section 3.2.1 General Syntax, page 16

	since <segment> is *<pchar>, it can be empty, implying that
	"foo/////bar" is a valid <rel_path>.  Is this correct?

Section 3.2.3 URI comparison, page 17

	What is the intended behavior of the comparison for two
	different host identifiers (names or addresses) which refer to
	the same host?  From the spec, one could conclude any of the
	following:  (1) this issue was neglected; (2) the comparison
	algorithm is spared the effort and expense of doing DNS
	accesses; (3) the comparison algorithm is prohibited from
	doing DNS accesses.  The comparison algorithm's behavior
	toward synonomous host identifiers, and the reason for that
	behavior, should be explicitly stated.
Received on Tuesday, 23 July 1996 15:22:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:17 UTC