Opened 9 years ago

Closed 9 years ago

#490 closed editorial (incorporated)

p5 editorial comments

Reported by: julian.reschke@… Owned by: draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range@…
Priority: normal Milestone: 24
Component: p5-range Severity: In WG Last Call
Keywords: Cc:



  1. 3.1 Range:

Para 4 (p7)

A proxy MAY either discard a Range header field that contains a range unit it does not understand or pass it to the next inbound server when forwarding the request.

What does "next inbound server" mean? Range is a request header, therefore these should only be going in 1 direction, and that's from client to server. I'd propose

"A proxy MAY discard a Range header field that contains a range unit it does not understand".

Para 5 (p7)

" A server that supports range requests ought to ignore or reject a Range header field that consists of more than two overlapping ranges"

does "ought to" mean SHOULD? How is the rejection envisaged, a 416?

  1. If-Range

p5 (v22) doesn't specify what to do if there is an invalid date specified (e.g. not a well formed date / fails parsing). I would propose this is a non-match and therefore range processing is suppressed. Shouldn't there be some warning or something if Range processing is suppressed for various reasons? e.g.:

use of weak etag (prohibited) empty If-Range (ignore?) bad date

Change History (2)

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

From [2363]:

Tune language about proxies forwarding unknown range units; for overlapping excessive ranges, change the "ought to reject" to a "MAY" (because it's really purely optional) (see #490)

comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by julian.reschke@…

  • Milestone changed from unassigned to 24
  • Resolution set to incorporated
  • Status changed from new to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.