errata logo graphic

Found 2 records.

Status: Verified (1)

RFC7230, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing", June 2014

Source of RFC: httpbis (app)

Errata ID: 4050

Status: Verified
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Daisuke Miyakawa
Date Reported: 2014-07-11
Verifier Name: Barry Leiba
Date Verified: 2014-07-12

Section 3.2.4 says:

A server MUST reject any received request message that contains
whitespace between a header field-name and colon with a response code
of 400 (Bad Request).

It should say:

A server MUST reject any received request message that contains
whitespace between a header field-name and colon with a status code
of 400 (Bad Request).

Notes:

Basically HTTP RFCs seem to prefer "status code" over "response code". RFC 7231 Section 6 uses status code or "Response Status Code", but rarely uses the term "response code" (though it uses it, once). Some technical books actually refer those codes as "response codes". I tend to be confused with the mixture of those two terms.


Status: Rejected (1)

RFC7230, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing", June 2014

Source of RFC: httpbis (app)

Errata ID: 4136

Status: Rejected
Type: Editorial

Reported By: Frank Gevaerts
Date Reported: 2014-10-20
Rejected by: Barry Leiba
Date Rejected: 2014-10-21

Section A.2. says:

Bogus Content-Length header fields are now required to be handled as
errors by recipients.  (Section 3.3.2)

It should say:

Bogus Content-Length header fields are now required to be handled as
errors by recipients.  (Section 3.3.3)

Notes:

The mentioned requirement appears in 3.3.3 (5), not in 3.3.2
--VERIFIER NOTES--
The text in 3.3.3 is not what this item is referring to: it really is referring to Section 3.3.2 as a whole.


Report New Errata