- From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 09:51:05 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Le Jeu 25 juillet 2013 08:18, Julian Reschke a écrit : > On 2013-07-25 07:24, Willy Tarreau wrote: >> Hi, >> >> A user notified me that status codes 428, 429, 431, 511 introduced in >> RFC6585 by Mark & Roy are not mentionned at all in the current 1.1 >> draft. >> >> Shouldn't we copy them there, or at least add a reference to RFC6585 so >> that implementers know that these codes exist ? >> >> Thanks, >> Willy > > No, that would send the wrong message. > > The list in the spec is not exhaustive; there's an IANA registry for a > reason. But is there any good reason not to consolidate the codes that were known at the time? -- Nicolas Mailhot
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2013 07:51:39 UTC