RFC2616 is obsolete and references to it should be replaced with updated RFCs

[Joseph Heenan]

As per the discussion on #83, I suspect we should replace all the references to RFC2616 with references to the updated RFC7231 etc.

I could prepare a pull request for this if there's agreement it's the right thing to do.

[Sascha Preibisch]

This ticket was fixed by ticket #83. This can be closed as far as I see it

[Sascha Preibisch]

Duplicate of #83.

[Joseph Heenan]

Unfortunately not - there's 6 references to RFC2616 remaining, e.g.:

https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/annotate/f1b3c95660dce93404f2ff10aabb051b48ac718e/Financial_API_WD_001.md?at=master&fileviewer=file-view-default#Financial_API_WD_001.md-262

I think we should reopen this and probably remove all the RFC2616 references.

[Joseph Heenan]

pull request created to fix this: https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/pull-requests/18

[Edmund Jay]

Update places where we refer to the obsolete HTTP/1.1 RFC2616

closes #84

→ <<cset 6accf8e4db2f>>