- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 16:36:49 +0200
- To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
- Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@pobox.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2015-09-03 17:09, Ben Campbell wrote: > ... >>>> The intent of this spec is to be eventually in-lined into RFC7231bis; >>>> as such it might make sense to actually get rid of the first two >>>> SHOULDs. The SHOULD NOT actually can be a MUST NOT without the risk of >>>> making any existing server non-compliant which isn't already >>>> non-compliant. >>>> >>>> "Servers that fail a request due to an unsupported content coding >>>> ought to respond with a 415 status and ought to include an >>>> "Accept-Encoding" header field in that response, allowing clients to >>>> distinguish between content coding related issues and media type >>>> related issues. In order to avoid confusion with media type related >>>> problems, servers that fail a request with a 415 status for reasons >>>> unrelated to content codings MUST NOT include the "Accept-Encoding" >>>> header field." >>> >>> Are you proposing to make that change now, or at the point of merging >>> into RFC7231bis >> >> I think we should make this change right now. > > That would resolve my comment. Done in <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/2c1dd8dedfa0f2c5f2b4dd90a285816a119a69e8>. Is everybody ok with that change? Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 4 September 2015 14:37:28 UTC