- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 10:16:46 -0800
- To: drafts-lastcall@iana.org
- Cc: httpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-http2.all@tools.ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Thanks Pearl, I assume that the "NOT OK" refers to the need for expert review. Or are you concerned about us requesting a specific number (421) for the last action? On 13 January 2015 at 09:50, Pearl Liang via RT <drafts-lastcall@iana.org> wrote: > a new method will be registered as follows: > > Method Name: PRI > Safe: No > Idempotent: No > Reference: [ RFC-to-be ] > > Question: just to double check if the new requested method "PRI" is an abbreviation. > It appears that RFC7231 does not require a full name. That is correct. Method names don't require a full name. In this case, a full name could be confusing, since this is a defensive registration only.
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2015 18:17:13 UTC