-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 204
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
update refs for -12 of http core drafts #4182
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for doing this scrub, Julian. A few things here where I think there might be a more appropriate reference.
draft-ietf-quic-http.md
Outdated
@@ -459,8 +459,8 @@ An HTTP message (request or response) consists of: | |||
3. optionally, the trailer field section, if present, sent as a single HEADERS | |||
frame. | |||
|
|||
Header and trailer field sections are described in Section 5 of {{!SEMANTICS}}; | |||
the payload body is described in Section 7.3.3 of {{!SEMANTICS}}. | |||
Header and trailer field sections are described in Section 5.4 of {{!SEMANTICS}}; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Section 5.4 is about headers only, not trailers. This may need to explicitly reference 5.4 and 5.6 to get the equivalent context. Also, this paragraph will need to be rewrapped.
draft-ietf-quic-http.md
Outdated
@@ -1773,7 +1773,7 @@ attack on a plaintext protocol. | |||
## Intermediary Encapsulation Attacks | |||
|
|||
The HTTP/3 field encoding allows the expression of names that are not valid | |||
field names in the syntax used by HTTP (Section 5.3 of {{!SEMANTICS}}). Requests | |||
field names in the syntax used by HTTP (Section 5.4.3 of {{!SEMANTICS}}). Requests |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This paragraph needs to be rewrapped.
@reschke could you please help us out by responding to Mike's comments. This PR you kindly made will help us address issues raised during AD review, which is a blocker to LC. |
If @reschke isn't responding, @MikeBishop should use his best judgement and then merge this. |
I only did a mechanical check (restoring the references that were there before). @MikeBishop - if you feel that these can be improved just go ahead. |
No description provided.