- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:32:08 -0700
- To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Thanks. On 28/07/2011, at 11:11 AM, Eric J. Bowman wrote: > Mark Nottingham wrote: >> >> An alternate approach would be to deprecate the Content-MD5 header >> itself, since MD5 is deprecated, other signature mechanisms are being >> worked on, and the conflicting interpretations of this header make >> interop difficult. >> > > There are a couple references to Content-MD5 remaining, which is > confusing now that no Content-MD5 section exists; I suggest removing > mention of Content-MD5 from the following, perhaps making a note or two > in the "changes from RFC 2616" sections: p1 7.1.3.2, p2 7.4. > > -Eric -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 20:32:32 UTC