- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:40:07 +1000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I agree that the original sentence:
> A server that does not support such an extension MAY discard the
> request body.
was nonsense, but it would be helpful to spell out what a server
should do if it doesn't support such an extension.
E.g.,
"""An origin server (or proxy server, if Max-Forwards is 0) that does
not support such an extension SHOULD respond with 415 Unsupported
Media Type."""
Although, given the sentence we're talking about taking out, this may
be closer to the original intent:
"""An origin server (or proxy server, if Max-Forwards is 0) that does
not support such an extension MAY ignore the request body."""
On 31/05/2008, at 1:04 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to resolve issue 98 (<http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/98
> >, "OPTIONS request body) soon.
>
> The proposed change (<http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/98/i98.diff
> >) follows Roy's advice that the sentence in question ("A server
> that does not support such an extension MAY discard the request
> body.") is just nonsense, and thus should be removed.
>
> BR, Julian
>
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 2 June 2008 04:40:49 UTC