- From: Robert Collins <robertc@squid-cache.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:30:36 +1300
- To: Dan Winship <dan.winship@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 2:56 AM, Dan Winship <dan.winship@gmail.com> wrote: > Part 1, section 6.1.3.1 "End-to-end and Hop-by-hop Header Fields" > says: > >> The following HTTP/1.1 header fields are hop-by-hop header fields: >> >> o Connection >> o ... >> o Upgrade >> >> All other header fields defined by HTTP/1.1 are end-to-end header >> fields. >> >> Other hop-by-hop header fields MUST be listed in a Connection header >> field (Section 8.1). > > The fact that it says that "Other" fields must be listed means that > the headers in the preceding list *don't* need to be listed, right? No, it has no bearing on the preceding list. > I suspect that 8.4 and 8.7 are just wrong, and 8.1 needs to clarify > that it's only talking about newly-defined connection options, not the > predefined-hop-by-one ones, right? Again, no. You've drawn a conclusion that wasn't suggested at by the text. -Rob
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 22:31:08 UTC