Wording to close out REDIRECTS issue.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen: "Re: new editorial issue RANGE_WITH_CONTENTCODING"
• Previous message: Jim Gettys: "Claification requested in Host: (HOST issue proposed wording.)"

This ended up becoming an editorial issue, but for completeness,
here's what I've put into the document.
				- Jim

Old text:
10.3 Redirection 3xx

This class of status code indicates that further action needs to be taken 
by the user agent in order to fulfill the request.  The action required 
MAY be carried out by the user agent without interaction with the user if 
and only if the method used in the second request is GET or HEAD. A user
agent SHOULD NOT automatically redirect a request more than 5 times, since such
redirections usually indicate an infinite loop.

New text:

10.3 Redirection 3xx

This class of status code indicates that further action needs to be taken 
by the user agent in order to fulfill the request.  The action required 
MAY be carried out by the user agent without interaction with the user if 
and only if the method used in the second request is GET or HEAD. A client 
SHOULD detect infinite redirection loops, since such loops generate 
network traffic for each redirection. 

	Note: previous versions of this specification recommended a maximum of 
	five redirections. Application developers should be aware that there may 
	be clients that implement such a fixed limitation.

• Next message: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen: "Re: new editorial issue RANGE_WITH_CONTENTCODING"
• Previous message: Jim Gettys: "Claification requested in Host: (HOST issue proposed wording.)"