W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: #429: Multiple header fields with the same field name - unwritten assumption about quoted commas in values?

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:15:17 +0100
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Piotr Dobrogost <p@ietf.dobrogost.net>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20130120071517.GG6838@1wt.eu>
Hi Mark,

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 01:53:39PM +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Now <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/429>.

Quite frankly, I'd prefer to stay on Roy's side which consists in saying
that when a compliant message is passed to an intermediary, the output is
a compliant message, and when a non-compliant message is passed, the
output is indetermined.

Otherwise we'll have to document all possible corner cases, which will
result in even worse implementations givent that we won't be exhaustive.

Probably that all the trouble comes from the obligations made to senders,
with senders sometimes being intermediaries. I've been bothered by this
in the past. So the point above at least would solve the issue for them :
they have to emit clean things but if they forward stupid things, well,
it's the other side's fault.

Received on Sunday, 20 January 2013 07:16:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:09 UTC