- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:41:01 +0200
- To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, ben@nostrum.com, alissa@cooperw.in, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 08:22:33AM -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote: > On 04/19/2016 12:18 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > I *think* we've come to a place where there's agreement on accepting the errata, but with BWS replacing OWS throughout; i.e.: > > > > chunk-ext = *( BWS ";" BWS chunk-ext-name [ BWS "=" BWS chunk-ext-val ] ) > > > > Everyone OK with that? > > FWIW, I am OK with that "better BWS than nothing" solution. And I'm OK as well. Cheers, Willy
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2016 14:41:46 UTC