httpbis: Ticket #55: Updating to RFC4288

Link: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/55

Origin: http://www.w3.org/mid/459E5791.10305@gmx.de

Component: non-specific

The update from RFC2048 to RFC4288 requires minor modifications for the media type registrations for "message/http", "application/http" and "multipart/byteranges".

Mails

NEW ISSUE: updating from RFC2048 to RFC4288 Julian Reschke (julian.reschke@gmx.de) (2007-01-05)

Associated Checkins

julian.reschke@greenbytes.de (Sat, 02 Feb 2008 14:37:16 GMT): [152]: Resolve #35: categorize RFC1737 (URN) as informative, RFC4288 (media type ...
fielding@gbiv.com (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:02:22 GMT): [197]: RFC4288 is not a normative ref; related to #55
fielding@gbiv.com (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:05:17 GMT): [196]: Update multipart/byteranges media type template to RFC4288 and note that ...; [197]: RFC4288 is not a normative ref; related to #55
julian.reschke@gmx.de (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 09:09:46 GMT): [200]: Note changes wrt to RFC4288, make reference to RFC4288 informative in Part ...

History

: comment added; component, milestone set (Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:08:11 GMT)

component set to non-specific
milestone set to unassigned

: comment added; owner set; status, milestone changed (Sat, 05 Jan 2008 01:57:38 GMT)

owner set to fielding@gbiv.com
status changed from new to assigned.
milestone changed from unassigned to 02.

: comment added (Sat, 02 Feb 2008 14:37:16 GMT)

The modifications were done in [152], but it wouldn't hurt to review them (and maybe fill out the "Applications that use this media type:" field (see < http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-01#appendix-A >).

: comment added (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:02:22 GMT)

From [197]:

RFC4288 is not a normative ref; related to #55

: comment added; resolution set; status changed (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:05:17 GMT)

status changed from assigned to closed.
resolution set to fixed

The templates look fine. I don't have a list of applications. The types are primarily used for archives of message traffic and some forms of protocol encapsulation.

I made the same changes to p5 for multipart/byteranges in [196]. Note that 4288 is not a normative dependency [197].

I don't think that there is anything more we need to do here, so i am closing the issue.

: comment added (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 09:09:46 GMT)

From [200]:

Note changes wrt to RFC4288, make reference to RFC4288 informative in Part 3, too; related to #55.

Related Information

Issues List Index