![(please configure the [header_logo] section in trac.ini)](https://www.ietf.org/images/ietflogotrans.gif)
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
#203 closed design (fixed)
Max-Forwards vs extension methods
| Reported by: | julian.reschke@… | Owned by: | julian.reschke@… |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 13 |
| Component: | p2-semantics | Severity: | Active WG Document |
| Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-09.html#rfc.section.9.5:
"The Max-Forwards header field MAY be ignored for all other methods defined by this specification and for any extension methods for which it is not explicitly referred to as part of that method definition."
This seems to suggest that we should require extension method definitions to define the Max-Forwards behavior (affect on registry).
Alternatively, remove this and clarify it's for OPTIONS and TRACE only.
Attachments (1)
Change History (8)
comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Owner set to julian.reschke@…
- Status changed from new to assigned
comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by mnot@…
Agreement in Maastricht that it's only practical on OPTIONS and TRACE
comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Milestone changed from unassigned to 13
- Status changed from assigned to new
comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…
comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Resolution set to incorporated
- Status changed from new to closed
comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by mnot@…
- Resolution incorporated deleted
- Status changed from closed to reopened
comment:7 Changed 8 years ago by mnot@…
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from reopened to closed
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
I believe allowing new methods to use this isn't going to work in practice. So better just drop the sentence indicating this could work.