- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 23:05:33 +1000
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
No objections, and I note that 2616 already says in 9.1.2: "Also, the methods OPTIONS and TRACE SHOULD NOT have side effects, and so are inherently idempotent." Julian, please go ahead. On 05/06/2009, at 10:31 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Proposal: > > Confirm both OPTIONS and TRACE as safe methods. Any objections? > > > On 04/06/2009, at 3:48 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >> No real opinion. I suppose it is safe, in the sense that it doesn't >> change the state of the resource. Whether it should be >> automatically redirected isn't a terribly interesting question >> AFAICT, so I think it is... >> >> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/171 >> >> >> On 03/06/2009, at 3:28 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> >>> Mark Nottingham wrote: >>>> Yes, that's what I'm suggesting. >>>> Cheers, >>> >>> We already state that in Part 2, Section 10.1, but that is only >>> the IANA registration (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-06.html#rfc.section.10.1 >>> >)... >>> >>> So yes, the method description should state that as well. >>> >>> What about TRACE then (which is the 4th candidate)? >>> >>> BR, Julian >> >> >> -- >> Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ >> >> > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 13 June 2009 13:06:11 UTC