- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 19:48:50 +0000
- To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, RUELLAN Herve <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <20141020165353.GA25743@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes: +1 I like this, it's nice and orthogonal. >- Indices between 1 and the length of the static table (inclusive) >- refer to elements in the static table (see Section 2.3.1). >- >+ Both the static and the dynamic tables are indexed starting at 1. > Indices strictly greater than the length of the static table refer to > elements in the dynamic table (see Section 2.3.2). The length of the > static table is subtracted to find the index into the dynamic table. These three lines left in conflict somewhat with the four lines you add below. > >- Indices strictly greater than the sum of the lengths of both tables >- MUST be treated as a decoding error. >+ Static table indices strictly greater than the length of the table as >+ defined in Appendix A MUST be treated as a decoding error. Dynamic table >+ indices strictly greater than the length of the dynamic table MUST be >+ treated as a decoding error. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 20 October 2014 19:49:17 UTC