- From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
- Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 10:07:03 +0300 (EEST)
- To: HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- CC: Matt Menke <mmenke@google.com>, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@varnish-cache.org>
> The token rule in RFC7230 already includes asterisks, so I don't think identifier or token_or_asterix
> is needed.
Yes.
3.2.6. Field Value Components
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3.2.6
| token = 1*tchar
|
| tchar = "!" / "#" / "$" / "%" / "&" / "'" / "*"
| / "+" / "-" / "." / "^" / "_" / "`" / "|" / "~"
| / DIGIT / ALPHA
| ; any VCHAR, except delimiters
> On single/multiple headers: The draft has a comment about this, but it doesn't really comment on
> whether the following is legal:
>
> Foo: >bar<
> Foo: >baz<
>
> Or:
>
> Foo: >bar<, >baz<
3. HTTP/1 serialization of HTTP header Common Structure
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kamp-httpbis-structure-00#section-3
seems NOT accept later (this is problem)
| h1_common-structure-header =
| ( field-name ":" OWS ">" h1_common_structure "<" )
| # Self-identifying HTTP headers
| ( field-name ":" OWS h1_common_structure ) /
| # legacy HTTP headers on white-list, see {{iana}}
But
Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230
says
3.2.2. Field Order
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-3.2.2
| A recipient MAY combine multiple header fields with the same field
| name into one "field-name: field-value" pair, without changing the
| semantics of the message, by appending each subsequent field value to
| the combined field value in order, separated by a comma.
/ Kari Hurtta
Received on Saturday, 15 October 2016 07:07:33 UTC