Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
#468 closed design (fixed)
Expectation Extensions
Reported by: | mnot@… | Owned by: | draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics@… |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 24 |
Component: | p2-semantics | Severity: | In WG Last Call |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
p2 5.1.1 requires that an unrecognised expectation be replied to with a 417 Expectation Failed.
In my testing, it's fairly common for servers to ignore an unregistered expectation (e.g., "foo").
Given how many problems we already have with Expect, should we consider disallowing further extensions here, and removing this requirement?
Change History (7)
comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Milestone changed from unassigned to 24
- Resolution set to wontfix
- Status changed from new to closed
comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by fielding@…
- Resolution wontfix deleted
- Status changed from closed to reopened
Reopening as per discussion on list http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013JulSep/0685.html
comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by fielding@…
comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by fielding@…
- Resolution set to incorporated
- Status changed from reopened to closed
comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…
comment:6 Changed 9 years ago by mnot@…
- Resolution incorporated deleted
- Status changed from closed to reopened
comment:7 Changed 9 years ago by mnot@…
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from reopened to closed
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
Closing as WONTFIX as per <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013AprJun/0967.html>