- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 07:42:10 +0200
- To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2016-06-03 02:29, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> ...
> If the response is influenced by a header, then it needs to ('SHOULD')
> be listed.
> ...
MUST, I think. But this doesn't need normative language here, just refer
to the base spec.
>>> 3. Are requirements like "If DPR occurs in a message more than once"
>>> (ditto for the other fields) useful? Duplicating these fields is
>>> already invalid per RFC 7230.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, happy drop those if they're no longer needed. Any objections?
>
> The fact of being invalid is covered by 7230.
>
> But how to handle these specific headers when invalid situations occur
> is still needed in the more specific document.
It's not strictly needed, but if you don't specify it, you'll likely
cause implementors to make different decisions. That might be harmless
for client hints, but it wasn't for other fields (such as Content-Length).
Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 3 June 2016 05:42:37 UTC