Ignore:
Timestamp:
Oct 28, 2010, 6:24:45 AM (9 years ago)
Author:
julian.reschke@…
Message:

make the comment about redirection status codes less specific (for instance, we deprecated 305 for issue #76)

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p1-messaging.xml

    r1063 r1069  
    3535  <!ENTITY status-100             "<xref target='Part2' x:rel='#status.100' xmlns:x='http://purl.org/net/xml2rfc/ext'/>">
    3636  <!ENTITY status-1xx             "<xref target='Part2' x:rel='#status.1xx' xmlns:x='http://purl.org/net/xml2rfc/ext'/>">
     37  <!ENTITY status-3xx             "<xref target='Part2' x:rel='#status.3xx' xmlns:x='http://purl.org/net/xml2rfc/ext'/>">
    3738  <!ENTITY status-414             "<xref target='Part2' x:rel='#status.414' xmlns:x='http://purl.org/net/xml2rfc/ext'/>">
    3839]>
     
    32923293   The Upgrade header field cannot be used to indicate a switch to a
    32933294   protocol on a different connection. For that purpose, it is more
    3294    appropriate to use a 301, 302, 303, or 305 redirection response.
     3295   appropriate to use a 3xx redirection response (&status-3xx;).
    32953296</t>
    32963297<t>
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.