- From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
- Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 15:08:41 -0700
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 12/2/11 3:06 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2011-12-02 22:36, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> I notice that 413 didn't end up in draft-nottingham-http-new-status
>
> 413 already exists ("Request Entity Too Large"); we thought about
> extending it to cover this case (and did with
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/255) but then decided
> that a new code makes more sense. (So the change for ticket #255 will be
> backed out once we know 431 goes ahead).
>
> Any while I type this I see you updated the ticket :-)
>
>> (although it does have "431 Request Header Fields Too Large"). Where did
>> we end up on this one?
>> ...
>
> The definition of 413 will be reverted back to what it said before
> change <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1310>.
Thanks for the clarifications.
Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 22:09:12 UTC