W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Comments on the HTTPbis draft, v20

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 12:35:27 +1200
To: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <c2a61992031af38f476c5e62656361ab@treenet.co.nz>
On 06.09.2012 08:07, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2012, at 10:13 AM, Adrian Custer wrote:
>
>> This mail contains some initial editorial comments, questions, and 
>> recommendations for the httpbis draft 
>> (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/), version 20.
>
> Please note that p1 and p2 are under extensive reconstruction right 
> now,
> much of which involves targeting the requirements.  p1's sections 1-4
> are relatively stable, but I suggest you wait on the rest of your 
> review
> of p1 and p2 until drafts 21 are out.  Draft 20 of p4-p7 are 
> currently in
> WGLC and would be a better target for careful review right now.
>
> I'll have a look at what you mention as I run through p1.  However,
> please note that your understanding of SHOULD is incorrect: it is to
> be used in cases where the list of conditions for not complying are
> *not* known in advance.  When compliance is bound by a specific set 
> of
> conditions, then we say "X MUST do this except when ...".
>
> Also, the lack of a requirement that servers send a response is
> on purpose.  See discussion of denial-of-service attacks.  Perhaps
> what is should say is "MUST send a response or close the connection".

+1. "MUST send a conformant response or close the connection" would be 
good to explicitly mention that early on.

AYJ
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2012 00:36:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 6 September 2012 00:36:18 GMT