Re: [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Gen-art last call review of draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-17.txt]]

Julian Reschke schrieb:
>>> updates the registrations (and in a sense formalizes them since RFC 2518
>>> did not have an IANA Considerations section explicitly). s21.1 should
>>> refer to RFC 4395 which controls the URI Scheme registry. s21.3 should
>>> refer to RFC 4229 which formalized the initial state of the message
>>> header field registrations.  It occurs to me that I did not check if
>>> there are any message headers which were in RFC 2518 but are now dropped
>>> - if so this should probably be recorded here.
>>
>> Adding the two references is simple (opened: 
>> <http://ietf.osafoundation.org:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264>).

Turns out that we also need to update the HTTP status code registry (see
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2817#section-7.1> and
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes>).

Best regards, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2007 17:24:45 UTC