IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: 103 (Early Hints) vs. response headers

Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de> Thu, 16 March 2017 16:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 B7649129687 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:09:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=greenbytes.de header.b=Pn0WjhiW; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=greenbytes.de header.b=Pn0WjhiW
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SN41ZJOoaIlz for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:09:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E76D129680 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1coXuw-0002yg-QP for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:06:22 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:06:22 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1coXuw-0002yg-QP@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>) id 1coXus-0002xR-Kf for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:06:18 +0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de ([5.10.171.186]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>) id 1coXum-0000T3-7F for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:06:13 +0000
Received: by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix, from userid 117) id 6026D15A0234; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:05:44 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1489680344; bh=xosM0WAsCqE3DQyceE2Vmw6VVhtuW1gYnwnQfFRVmYg=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=Pn0WjhiWs68NoSWeQMr18yIAchn6QqMu3jb5zCEWwsSC2wFxrsD7dXZnHucm+JUT/ /5kPWYlVp8df6qsxbwpnWiipE6Xmr7H9V3nZVDZmZejxd+Jr6Ro+PfUxFyCYnL4DZn HnPQJzkNarYhMuviU99ED/ix5ZMWigyA6B/1t0LA=
Received: from delight.fritz.box (unknown [84.150.76.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9FA4C15A0234; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:05:43 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=greenbytes.de; s=mail; t=1489680344; bh=xosM0WAsCqE3DQyceE2Vmw6VVhtuW1gYnwnQfFRVmYg=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=Pn0WjhiWs68NoSWeQMr18yIAchn6QqMu3jb5zCEWwsSC2wFxrsD7dXZnHucm+JUT/ /5kPWYlVp8df6qsxbwpnWiipE6Xmr7H9V3nZVDZmZejxd+Jr6Ro+PfUxFyCYnL4DZn HnPQJzkNarYhMuviU99ED/ix5ZMWigyA6B/1t0LA=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
In-Reply-To: <CANatvzxoqDhDh0KgG3Jw29GQdrvL6GQjXPJUYiDiKJ-hPNt2GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:05:43 +0100
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Vasiliy Faronov <vfaronov@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <D639B7C8-501C-450B-B017-499EAC7E7AB2@greenbytes.de>
References: <CALHHdhwQBfBN0Xz-4kxRJrJekiCLnro1i-MVw954wTRyOWAtvw@mail.gmail.com> <E10BB6E0-3BD8-44EC-AE18-076D38077371@mnot.net> <CANatvzxS7Z9U5Jr2N_EeyY5NUrZ-weuGsetuUQdLWGGOQKVLNw@mail.gmail.com> <20170315062242.GB13814@1wt.eu> <CANatvzyeYxHFDDh-Hms6V0gJ+MkgW6v78uLj9bieR_nAaOfPHw@mail.gmail.com> <20170316143158.GB15641@1wt.eu> <CANatvzxoqDhDh0KgG3Jw29GQdrvL6GQjXPJUYiDiKJ-hPNt2GQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.10.171.186; envelope-from=stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de; helo=mail.greenbytes.de
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.453, BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1coXum-0000T3-7F bd8549355f2fe3cad140b5696b38d82e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 103 (Early Hints) vs. response headers
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/D639B7C8-501C-450B-B017-499EAC7E7AB2@greenbytes.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33743
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@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>

> Am 16.03.2017 um 16:10 schrieb Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>:
> 
> Therefore, my preference goes to explicitly stating that the headers
> of a 103 response must not be applied as part of the informational
> response, and if there's a need in practice to make such distinction,
> introduce negotiation to Early Hints.

+1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email