W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: #178: Content-MD5 and partial responses

From: Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:11:37 -0600
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20110728121137.9f13906a.eric@bisonsystems.net>
Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> An alternate approach would be to deprecate the Content-MD5 header
> itself, since MD5 is deprecated, other signature mechanisms are being
> worked on, and the conflicting interpretations of this header make
> interop difficult.
> 

There are a couple references to Content-MD5 remaining, which is
confusing now that no Content-MD5 section exists; I suggest removing
mention of Content-MD5 from the following, perhaps making a note or two
in the "changes from RFC 2616" sections:  p1 7.1.3.2, p2 7.4.

-Eric
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 18:12:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:46 GMT