IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: 1xx response semantics

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Tue, 05 July 2011 08:27 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BC6B21F8719 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 01:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5Nv2jJv3JKsi for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 01:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F6221F865C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 01:27:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Qe0yN-0005V8-0C for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:27:11 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1Qe0yH-0005UI-Qh for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:27:05 +0000
Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1Qe0yG-0003cE-CN for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:27:05 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p658QeF2014936; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 10:26:40 +0200
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 10:26:40 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110705082640.GC14842@1wt.eu>
References: <20110705065339.GF12909@1wt.eu> <2963.1309850242@critter.freebsd.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2963.1309850242@critter.freebsd.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.212.114.60; envelope-from=w@1wt.eu; helo=1wt.eu
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Qe0yG-0003cE-CN 742ba1de4e4b3f156c34f0af5ad2ad7e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 1xx response semantics
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20110705082640.GC14842@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/10891
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Qe0yN-0005V8-0C@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:27:11 +0000

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 07:17:22AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20110705065339.GF12909@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes:
> >On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 06:13:03AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> 
> >After all, saying that 101 is an exception to 1xx
> >is not much different from saying that 204 is an exception to 2xx in
> >that it does not hold any body.
> 
> Explaining that it is in the wrong group would make the overall scheme
> clearer and hopefully deter similar additions in the future.

It could be an idea. Maybe we could express it slightly differently though,
in order not to confuse too much the rare people who read specs. Something
saying that 101 is always the last HTTP response.

Willy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email