Changeset 142

Timestamp:

04/01/08 13:27:42 (15 years ago)

Author:

julian.reschke@…

Message:

Update another entry in "Changes from RCF2068" with links, and repeat it in a second part.

Location:

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest

Files:

• p5-range.html (modified) (6 diffs)
• p5-range.xml (modified) (1 diff)
• p6-cache.html (modified) (1 diff)
• p6-cache.xml (modified) (1 diff)

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p5-range.html

@@ -904 +904 @@
       </p>
       <p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.3">Range request responses would become very verbose if all meta-data were always returned; by allowing the server to only send
-         needed headers in a 206 response, this problem can be avoided.
+         needed headers in a 206 response, this problem can be avoided. (Section <a href="#status.206" id="rfc.xref.status.206.1" title="206 Partial Content">3.1</a> and <a href="#header.if-range" id="rfc.xref.header.if-range.3" title="If-Range">5.3</a>)
       </p>
       <p id="rfc.section.B.1.p.4">Fix problem with unsatisfiable range requests; there are two cases: syntactic problems, and range doesn't exist in the document.
@@ -911 +911 @@
       </p>
       <h2 id="rfc.section.B.2"><a href="#rfc.section.B.2">B.2</a>&nbsp;<a id="changes.from.rfc.2616" href="#changes.from.rfc.2616">Changes from RFC 2616</a></h2>
-      <p id="rfc.section.B.2.p.1">Clarify that it is not ok to use a weak cache validator in a 206 response. (<a href="#status.206" id="rfc.xref.status.206.1" title="206 Partial Content">Section&nbsp;3.1</a>)
+      <p id="rfc.section.B.2.p.1">Clarify that it is not ok to use a weak cache validator in a 206 response. (<a href="#status.206" id="rfc.xref.status.206.2" title="206 Partial Content">Section&nbsp;3.1</a>)
       </p>
       <h1 id="rfc.section.C"><a href="#rfc.section.C">C.</a>&nbsp;Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)
@@ -965 +965 @@
          <ul class="ind">
             <li class="indline0"><a id="rfc.index.2" href="#rfc.index.2"><b>2</b></a><ul class="ind">
-                  <li class="indline1">206 Partial Content (status code)&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.3"><b>3.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.206.1">B.2</a></li>
+                  <li class="indline1">206 Partial Content (status code)&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.3"><b>3.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.206.1">B.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.206.2">B.2</a></li>
                </ul>
             </li>
@@ -1012 +1012 @@
                         <li class="indline1">Accept-Ranges&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.h.1"><b>5.1</b></a></li>
                         <li class="indline1">Content-Range&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.content-range.1">2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.content-range.2">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.content-range.3">3.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.h.2"><b>5.2</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.content-range.4">B.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.content-range.5">B.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.content-range.6">B.1</a></li>
-                        <li class="indline1">If-Range&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.h.3"><b>5.3</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.2">5.4.2</a></li>
+                        <li class="indline1">If-Range&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.h.3"><b>5.3</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.2">5.4.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.3">B.1</a></li>
                         <li class="indline1">Range&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.range.1">2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.range.2">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.range.3">3.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.h.4"><b>5.4</b></a></li>
                      </ul>
@@ -1019 +1019 @@
             </li>
             <li class="indline0"><a id="rfc.index.I" href="#rfc.index.I"><b>I</b></a><ul class="ind">
-                  <li class="indline1">If-Range header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.i.1"><b>5.3</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.2">5.4.2</a></li>
+                  <li class="indline1">If-Range header&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.i.1"><b>5.3</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.2">5.4.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.header.if-range.3">B.1</a></li>
                </ul>
             </li>
@@ -1053 +1053 @@
                   <li class="indline1">Status Codes&nbsp;&nbsp;
                      <ul class="ind">
-                        <li class="indline1">206 Partial Content&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.s.1"><b>3.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.206.1">B.2</a></li>
+                        <li class="indline1">206 Partial Content&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.s.1"><b>3.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.206.1">B.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.206.2">B.2</a></li>
                         <li class="indline1">416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.iref.s.2"><b>3.2</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.416.1">5.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.status.416.2">B.1</a></li>
                      </ul>

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p5-range.xml

@@ -1080 +1080 @@
    were always returned; by allowing the server to only send needed
    headers in a 206 response, this problem can be avoided.
+   (Section <xref target="status.206" format="counter"/>
+   and <xref target="header.if-range" format="counter"/>)
 </t>
 <t>

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p6-cache.html

@@ -1822 +1822 @@
       <p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.3">Proxies should be able to add Content-Length when appropriate. (<a href="#non-modifiable.headers" title="Non-modifiable Headers">Section&nbsp;2.5.2</a>)
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.4">The Cache-Control: max-age directive was not properly defined for responses. (<a href="#modifications.of.the.basic.expiration.mechanism" title="Modifications of the Basic Expiration Mechanism">Section&nbsp;3.2.3</a>)
-      </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.5">Warnings could be cached incorrectly, or not updated appropriately. (Section <a href="#warnings" title="Warnings">2.1.2</a>, <a href="#expiration.calculations" title="Expiration Calculations">2.2.4</a>, <a href="#non-modifiable.headers" title="Non-modifiable Headers">2.5.2</a>, <a href="#combining.headers" title="Combining Headers">2.5.3</a>, <a href="#modifications.of.the.basic.expiration.mechanism" title="Modifications of the Basic Expiration Mechanism">3.2.3</a>, and <a href="#header.warning" id="rfc.xref.header.warning.6" title="Warning">3.6</a>) Warning also needed to be a general header, as PUT or other methods may have need for it in requests.
+      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.4">Range request responses would become very verbose if all meta-data were always returned; by allowing the server to only send
+         needed headers in a 206 response, this problem can be avoided. (<a href="#combining.headers" title="Combining Headers">Section&nbsp;2.5.3</a>)
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.5">The Cache-Control: max-age directive was not properly defined for responses. (<a href="#modifications.of.the.basic.expiration.mechanism" title="Modifications of the Basic Expiration Mechanism">Section&nbsp;3.2.3</a>)
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.p.6">Warnings could be cached incorrectly, or not updated appropriately. (Section <a href="#warnings" title="Warnings">2.1.2</a>, <a href="#expiration.calculations" title="Expiration Calculations">2.2.4</a>, <a href="#non-modifiable.headers" title="Non-modifiable Headers">2.5.2</a>, <a href="#combining.headers" title="Combining Headers">2.5.3</a>, <a href="#modifications.of.the.basic.expiration.mechanism" title="Modifications of the Basic Expiration Mechanism">3.2.3</a>, and <a href="#header.warning" id="rfc.xref.header.warning.6" title="Warning">3.6</a>) Warning also needed to be a general header, as PUT or other methods may have need for it in requests.
       </p>
       <h2 id="rfc.section.A.2"><a href="#rfc.section.A.2">A.2</a>&nbsp;<a id="changes.from.rfc.2616" href="#changes.from.rfc.2616">Changes from RFC 2616</a></h2>

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p6-cache.xml

@@ -2835 +2835 @@
 </t>
 <t>
+   Range request responses would become very verbose if all meta-data
+   were always returned; by allowing the server to only send needed
+   headers in a 206 response, this problem can be avoided.
+   (<xref target="combining.headers"/>)
+</t>
+<t>
    The Cache-Control: max-age directive was not properly defined for
    responses. (<xref target="modifications.of.the.basic.expiration.mechanism"/>)