IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: "Timeout" request header to tell server to wait for resource to become available

Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au> Sat, 28 March 2015 02:51 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E03901A1B69 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:51:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.289
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.289 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 Z9AKm72AUz7A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:51:06 -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 BAED61A1B64 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YbgmP-0001Pw-ND for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 02:47:21 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 02:47:21 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YbgmP-0001Pw-ND@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <phluid61@gmail.com>) id 1YbgmE-0001P6-U6 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 02:47:10 +0000
Received: from mail-oi0-f43.google.com ([209.85.218.43]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <phluid61@gmail.com>) id 1YbgmC-0002de-Kd for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 02:47:10 +0000
Received: by oifl3 with SMTP id l3so90837460oif.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:46:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=7FMg5acbwCESNsJ8SHiELRQZed10KDNUp5ZMWAedQq0=; b=eyOE+TlCUrfjM9DNitXWoZymUqkTq1JGikXVrihC5b2thvHh2hFV1mVbjr4tJC021s tXermEszXvnXdVz2PEkb9skOaANgBAK2LtMFPvuPzTc/12iQ577qkYgzZvum9s+BcI4z y3D6YFONwssAB3aOWFrqI14Rmm9IooCMtZUjkPWqpXZgYfsJW+u3dYPqZBN/4nl9C+MN DQpBMxcXYebONyzlIbIsZZAALW0MBFKtHh6NQECda9oWbeBMcZe4vUCQ7e4jXSR/R2J8 IDVM/uy+6egSwJmO66rScD4ItL+aGi4Idhw7YZByg2mFFJUqNXEEY1WsCM2e8nRR5cUc Sx4g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.236.196 with SMTP id uw4mr18506989obc.41.1427510802650; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:46:42 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: phluid61@gmail.com
Received: by 10.202.178.3 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:46:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnW1hR=utRNAYJhYDLtQiofAjdCYj1UQyC13duNMmOA5Ng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5515D627.1000106@brendanlong.com> <CABkgnnW1hR=utRNAYJhYDLtQiofAjdCYj1UQyC13duNMmOA5Ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 12:46:42 +1000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ID9d77JIaaqH8s0FRTnLNzvpU1U
Message-ID: <CACweHNDyy14A4yRkbUqRgY0fu8t-G46B5q2GDQgEEeYnXYCuDw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Brendan Long <self@brendanlong.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c300ee4e1d7e05125042aa"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.218.43; envelope-from=phluid61@gmail.com; helo=mail-oi0-f43.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.728, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1YbgmC-0002de-Kd 03111e7c433e1dfbb2b6997eee537ae7
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: "Timeout" request header to tell server to wait for resource to become available
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CACweHNDyy14A4yRkbUqRgY0fu8t-G46B5q2GDQgEEeYnXYCuDw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/29044
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>

On 28 March 2015 at 11:46, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I believe that what you want is accomplished by RFC 7240:
>
> Prefer: wait=5
>
> The units are perhaps suboptimal for your use case (seconds instead of
> milliseconds), but we might be able to make a change to support finer
> grained timing.
>
>
Incidentally, I've just found an erratum in RFC 7240: Section 1.1 says that
"delta-seconds" is defined in Section 8.1.3 of [RFC7231], but it's actually
in RFC 7234, Section-1.2.1. ​I'll report it.

Regarding extending/modifying the header to accept sub-second timings, how
would current implementations treat:

    Prefer: wait=0.2

? It doesn't fit the syntax, so would it be ignored outright (as an
unrecognised header) most of the time?

Cheers
-- 
  Matthew Kerwin
  http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status