Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5537 (1980)
Russ Allbery <[email protected]> Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:33:21 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.usenet.format |
|---|---|
| Organization | The Eyrie |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Alfred H=C3=B6nes <[email protected]> writes: > Russ, > thanks for your very quick responses. > The Control syntax seems to be the single issue that needs elaboration. > (I did not want to add too much stuff to the Errata note.) > Quoting from RFC 5536, Section 3.2.3, on top of page 18: > control =3D "Control:" SP *WSP control-command *WSP CRLF > control-command =3D verb *( 1*WSP argument ) > verb =3D token > argument =3D 1*( %x21-7E ) > These are the syntax rules for the entire header field, giving the > header field name, "Control", the separating colon ":", and the general > syntax of the header field value, essentially <control-command> plus > enclosing optional whitespace. [...] > The syntax of the entire Control header field is still given by the > <control> ABNF production from RFC 5536 (quoted above). However, taking > the RFC prose text literally, > ... The syntax of its Control header field is: > control-command =3D/ Newgroup-command > ... > would pretend to indicate that the "Control:" part were dropped here! Oh! I understand now. Given this, I agree with all the changes you propose and think the errata should be verified in its entirety. --=20 Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>