> On 20 Jan 2017, at 21:13, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:49 PM, William A Rowe Jr
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik
>> wrote:
>>> RFC 7231 has retired Content-MD5.
>>>
>>> Fair game to remove it from -trunk - or make it squeek 'debre
On 20 Jan 2017, at 20:49, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
> Note that https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7616.txt still provides
> for MD5 hashed
> digest auth keys. So removing this altogether will break mod_auth_digest in a
> manner that breaks existing user auth.
>
>
> Note that https://www.rfc-e
> On 20 Jan 2017, at 20:49, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik
> wrote:
>> RFC 7231 has retired Content-MD5.
>>
>> Fair game to remove it from -trunk - or make it squeek 'debrecated' at WARN
>> or INFO and retire it at the next minor release ?
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:49 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik
> wrote:
>> RFC 7231 has retired Content-MD5.
>>
>> Fair game to remove it from -trunk - or make it squeek 'debrecated' at WARN
>> or INFO and retire it at the next minor release ?
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik
wrote:
> RFC 7231 has retired Content-MD5.
>
> Fair game to remove it from -trunk - or make it squeek 'debrecated' at WARN
> or INFO and retire it at the next minor release ?
Removing what, precisely? Content-MD5 headers aren't implemented i
RFC 7231 has retired Content-MD5.
Fair game to remove it from -trunk - or make it squeek 'debrecated' at WARN or
INFO and retire it at the next minor release ?
Dw.