- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 21:46:57 +1000
- To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Tracking this in: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/442 On 18/04/2013, at 11:18 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > p1 3.2.3 says: > >> BWS is used where the grammar allows optional whitespace, for >> historical reasons, but senders SHOULD NOT generate it in messages; >> recipients MUST accept such bad optional whitespace and remove it >> before interpreting the field value or forwarding the message >> downstream. > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-22#section-3.2.3 > > Throughout our specs, BWS is used at the end of header fields: > header-field = field-name ":" OWS field-value BWS > > and in transfer-codings: > transfer-parameter = attribute BWS "=" BWS value > > and in Expect headers: > expectation = expect-name [ BWS "=" BWS expect-value] > *( OWS ";" [ OWS expect-param ] ) > expect-param = expect-name [ BWS "=" BWS expect-value ] > > and, finally, in auth-params on challenges and credentials: > auth-param = token BWS "=" BWS ( token / quoted-string ) > > Is this whitespace really "bad" enough to MUST-require that intermediaries (including load balancers and other hardware!) remove it before forwarding the message? > > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 11:47:23 UTC