IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: 1xx response semantics

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Tue, 05 July 2011 06:54 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 B1CDC11E80B8 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:54:30 -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 fzvc-j4XSBh0 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492FC11E80B7 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 23:54:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1QdzWW-00065t-1X for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:54:20 +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 1QdzWP-000653-Rz for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:54:14 +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 1QdzWL-0000ap-Pu for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:54:12 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p656rdCV014514; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 08:53:39 +0200
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 08:53:39 +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: <20110705065339.GF12909@1wt.eu>
References: <20110705051401.GB12909@1wt.eu> <13323.1309846383@critter.freebsd.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <13323.1309846383@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: aji.keio.w3.org 1QdzWL-0000ap-Pu 7af8fdd2e67e4a3d0a9036d810402591
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 1xx response semantics
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20110705065339.GF12909@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/10886
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: <E1QdzWW-00065t-1X@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 06:54:20 +0000

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 06:13:03AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20110705051401.GB12909@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes:
> 
> >In fact, 101 is a final status while 100 is an intermediate one.
> 
> That has always bugged, me: I think 101 should have been a 2xx or 3xx
> response.
> 
> Maybe simply acknowleding rather than generalizing from this mistake
> is the best idea ?

Maybe, how would you proceed then ? I think that describing what can
be an intermediate response and what can be a final one removes any
complicated case. 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.

Willy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email