Subject: Re: p2: Expectation extensions

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 19:30:27 +1000

The subsequent conversation doesn't demonstrate a lot of consensus here, so I'm happy to drop this issue. Any objection to that?

On 23/04/2013, at 5:22 PM, Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]> wrote:

> p2 5.1.1 requires that an unrecognised expectation be replied to with a 417 Expectation Failed. 
> 
> In my testing, it's fairly common for servers to ignore an unregistered expectation (e.g., "foo"). 
> 
> Given how many problems we already have with Expect, should we consider disallowing further extensions here, and removing this requirement?

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/