Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 4, 2012, 12:08:07 PM (8 years ago)
Author:
julian.reschke@…
Message:

Recommend to consider treatment of extension parameters in new scheme definitions (see #334)

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p7-auth.xml

    r1552 r1562  
    536536    <x:lt>
    537537    <t>
     538      Definitions of new schemes ought to define the treatment of unknown
     539      extension parameters. In general, a "must-ignore" rule is preferable
     540      over "must-understand", because otherwise it will be hard to introduce
     541      new parameters in the presence of legacy recipients. Furthermore,
     542      it's good to describe the policy for defining new parameters (such
     543      as "update the specification", or "use this registry").
     544    </t>
     545    </x:lt>
     546    <x:lt>
     547    <t>
    538548      Authentication schemes need to document whether they are usable in
    539549      origin-server authentication (i.e., using WWW-Authenticate), and/or
     
    14921502  <list style="symbols">
    14931503    <t>
     1504      <eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/334"/>:
     1505      "recipient behavior for new auth parameters"
     1506    </t>
     1507    <t>
    14941508      <eref target="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/342"/>:
    14951509      "WWW-Authenticate ABNF slightly ambiguous"
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.