- From: Bence Béky <bnc@chromium.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 09:31:57 -0400
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
- Cc: HTTP <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Thank you very much for the clarification. B On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> wrote: > On 2015-04-23 14:19, Bence Béky wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I need some clarification. I am writing a parser for ALTSVC header >> fields and wish to ignore unknown parameters. However, it is unclear >> to me whether a parameter without "=value" should be ignored or >> treated as malformed. > > > Good catch. > >> draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-06 Section 3 refers to "parameter". >> Section 1.1 says "parameter" is defined in RFC7230. In fact, RFC7230 >> has "transfer-parameter" but not "parameter". Also, RFC7230 Section >> says "Parameters are in the form of a name or name=value pair.", > > > I believe that's a bug that we introduced in 7230. > >> implicilty allowing names without values, but in the next line >> "transfer-parameter" is defined as a name=value pair, which disallowes >> names without values. On the other hand, RFC7231 Section 3.1.1.1 >> defines "parameter" as a name=value pair, but this is not what >> draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-06 refers to. > > > The intent was to use > > parameter = token "=" ( token / quoted-string ) > > I'll add that in the next version. > > Best regards, Julian >
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2015 13:32:45 UTC