Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpbis-cdn-loop-01.txt> (CDN Loop Prevention) to Proposed Standard

On 2018-12-04 23:21, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Hi Julian,
>> On 3 Dec 2018, at 1:51 am, Julian Reschke <> wrote:
>> s/[RFC7230], Section 5.7.1/Section 5.7.1 of [RFC7230]/
>>>    "tracking message forwards, avoiding request loops, and identifying
>>>    the protocol capabilities of senders along the request/response
>>>    chain."
>>>    In theory, Via could be used to identify these loops.  However, in
>>>    practice it is not used in this fashion, because some HTTP servers
>>>    use Via for other purposes - in particular, some implementations
>>>    disable some HTTP/1.1 features when the Via header is present.
>> It would be nice if this came with pointers to related bug reports so the reader could have a glance.
>>> 2.  The CDN-Loop Request Header Field
>>>    CDN-Loop: FooCDN, barcdn; host=""
>>>    CDN-Loop: baz-cdn; abc="123"; def="456", anotherCDN
>>>    Note that the token syntax does not allow whitespace, DQUOTE or any
>>>    of the characters "(),/:;<=>?@[]{}".  See [RFC7230], Section 3.2.6.
>> s/.  See [RFC7230], Section 3.2.6./([RFC7230], Section 3.2.6)./
>>>    Likewise, note the rules for when parameter values need to be quoted
>>>    in [RFC7231], Section 3.1.1.
>> s/[RFC7231], Section 3.1.1/Section 3.1.1 of [RFC7231]/
> Is this just personal preference, or is there a reason you suggest this form? I see nothing about it in RFC7322.

In this case it was a personal preference, but note that just because 
multiple forms are blessed, they work equally well everywhere...

Best regards, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2018 05:45:00 UTC