Re: draft-reschke-http-cice vs discussions in Toronto @ IETF 90: use as response header field

On 2015-02-02 11:55, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> On 2/02/2015 9:18 p.m., Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2015-02-02 09:07, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> Yes, but the semantics of those headers are exactly the same in both
>>> directions.
>>
>> I think that's the case here, too. No?
>>
>
> Unless I am completely mis-reading it.
>
> In both directions, and for all status codes it means "I can receive
> encoding format(s) X,Y,Z". The rest of the draft is just elaboration and
> specific syntax. Yes?

Yes. If we had done this in RFC 7231, it would have been something like 
5 additional lines.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Monday, 2 February 2015 11:02:55 UTC