Re: 1xx response semantics

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Tue, 05 July 2011 05:16 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 749EB21F85FF for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 22:16:05 -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 3SPnHMFY4w2Y for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 22:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC94A21F8600 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 22:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1QdxyA-0005wg-V6 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:14:46 +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 1Qdxy4-0005vJ-1M for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:14:40 +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 1Qdxxz-0005xY-7S for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:14:39 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p655E1VW014164; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 07:14:01 +0200
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 07:14:01 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110705051401.GB12909@1wt.eu>
References: <713362A0-3316-4B4C-B154-581CB32B8A9B@mnot.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <713362A0-3316-4B4C-B154-581CB32B8A9B@mnot.net>
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 1Qdxxz-0005xY-7S 0fc015ed75d2f04262aa61642d0e9f46
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 1xx response semantics
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20110705051401.GB12909@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/10882
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: <E1QdxyA-0005wg-V6@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:14:46 +0000

Hi Mark,

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 09:41:59AM +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> One (of many) of the issues with 1xx responses is that people don't know how to surface two responses to one request in APIs and tools. 
> 
> I think we could make things a bit easier for folks if we stated that the headers in a 1xx response are semantically not significant; i.e., it's OK for APIs, etc. to drop them on the floor, because the only information is in the status code.
> 
> This would mean that people shouldn't put headers on a 1xx response and expect applications to see them -- which I think is already the case today.

It's not exact because of 101 which should contain at least Upgrade and
Connection: Upgrade. In fact, 101 is a final status while 100 is an
intermediate one.

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" ?

Willy