Opened 8 years ago

Closed 8 years ago

#299 closed design (wontfix)

expand definition of 413 for header field size limits?

Reported by: julian.reschke@… Owned by:
Priority: normal Milestone: 18
Component: p2-semantics Severity: Active WG Document
Keywords: Cc:

Description

We should make a conscious decision about whether 413 can be used when a single header field is too big, or when the header section in total is too big.

Change History (5)

comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by julian.reschke@…

...or define additional codes, as proposed by Roy in <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2011JulSep/0010.html>.

comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by mnot@…

  • Priority changed from normal to later

Marking as 'later' because draft-nottingham-http-new-status may address this.

comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by mnot@…

  • Owner draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics@… deleted

comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by stpeter@…

Note: I have accepted draft-nottingham-http-new-status as an AD-sponsored document and will be moving it forward soon.

comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by mnot@…

  • Milestone changed from unassigned to 18
  • Priority changed from later to normal
  • Resolution set to wontfix
  • Status changed from new to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.