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)

i203.diff (942 bytes) - added by julian.reschke@… 9 years ago.
proposed patch for part 2

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (8)

comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Owner set to julian.reschke@…
  • Status changed from new to assigned

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.

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

Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…

proposed patch for part 2

comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…

From [1070]:

Restrict Max-Forwards to OPTIONS and TRACE (see #203)

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.