Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC9110 (7421)

Reject - this isn't valid.


> On 13 Apr 2023, at 5:21 am, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC9110,
> "HTTP Semantics".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7421
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Rajeev Kumar surroach <rajeevsurroach11@gmail.com>
> 
> Section: 9110
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> Https1.1 connection 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> https 1.1 url register 
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Easy way to connect with & message delivered me thoroughly
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC9110 (draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics-19)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : HTTP Semantics
> Publication Date    : June 2022
> Author(s)           : R. Fielding, Ed., M. Nottingham, Ed., J. Reschke, Ed.
> Category            : INTERNET STANDARD
> Source              : HTTP
> Area                : Applications and Real-Time
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

Received on Wednesday, 12 April 2023 22:57:18 UTC