On 2011-12-02 23:06, Julian Reschke wrote: > ... >> (although it does have "431 Request Header Fields Too Large"). Where did >> we end up on this one? >> ... > > The definition of 413 will be reverted back to what it said before > change <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1310>. > ... Sorry, me confused about two different headers. We did not change 413, as 431 was on the table. We *did* extend 503, and this can be backed out if we get 429. Best regards, JulianReceived on Friday, 2 December 2011 22:21:37 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:26 UTC