IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: 1xx response semantics

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Tue, 05 July 2011 06:53 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 B6A8C11E80B7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:53:12 -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 oLX9Rt2vJmTQ for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A9C11E80AF for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1QdzUU-00060c-1R for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:52:14 +0000
Received: from aji.keio.w3.org ([133.27.228.206]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1QdzUK-0005zj-Cy for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:52:04 +0000
Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]) by aji.keio.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1QdzUG-0000Xx-0y for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:52:03 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p656pBZF014508; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 08:51:11 +0200
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:51:11 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110705065111.GE12909@1wt.eu>
References: <713362A0-3316-4B4C-B154-581CB32B8A9B@mnot.net> <20110705051401.GB12909@1wt.eu> <4E12A669.9050202@treenet.co.nz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4E12A669.9050202@treenet.co.nz>
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: aji.keio.w3.org 1QdzUG-0000Xx-0y 08590e4adbafb3a7079906dfe3d50835
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 1xx response semantics
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20110705065111.GE12909@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/10885
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: <E1QdzUU-00060c-1R@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:52:14 +0000

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 05:51:37PM +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> >Maybe we should indicate that "headers are not significant on intermediate
> >responses such as 1xx, and are only meaningful on final responses such as
> >all other ones, including 101" ?
> >
> 
> Its always puzzled me why Upgrade got 101 while CONNECT gets 200. They 
> are not that dissimilar.

I perfectly agree with you on this, the issue is that it's been spec'd
like this and we have to live with it (as with a lot of special cases
for many other things).

Regards,
Willy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email