W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2013

#507 integer value parsing, Re: APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-24

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 16:50:48 -0800
Message-ID: <527AE3E8.3000207@gmx.de>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, apps-discuss@ietf.org, draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range.all@tools.ietf.org
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, ietf@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org
On 2013-10-29 01:13, S Moonesamy wrote:
> ...

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for
> this draft (for background on APPSDIR, please see
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate ).
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
> or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
> In Section 2.1:
>    "In the byte range syntax, first-byte-pos, last-byte-pos, and suffix-
>     length are expressed as decimal number of octets.  Since there is no
>     predefined limit to the length of a payload, recipients ought to
>     anticipate potentially large decimal numerals and prevent parsing
>     errors due to integer conversion overflows."
> There is a RFC 2119 "should" in Section 3.3.2 of
> draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-24 about integer conversion and a
> reference to Section 9.3 of that draft.  I may have missed integer
> conversation issues in the reviews.  I suggest doing a verification to
> verify that there is adequate text where it is applicable.
> ...

We discussed this during this weeks WG meeting, and the consensus was 
that we want to make both instances a "MUST".

The proposed change is here: 

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 7 November 2013 00:51:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:19 UTC