IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints-03.txt> (An HTTP Status Code for Indicating Hints) to Experimental RFC

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Wed, 28 June 2017 01:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A637129B2B; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=LBsEtERT; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=USNuUPJJ
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 jSJeV-lCyF8P; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 254D9129B22; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D98120905; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 21:07:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 27 Jun 2017 21:07:10 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=GZnmsEEMZYlFDGw8+d wDcl54agz1EjZDIhsQRiC47oY=; b=LBsEtERTh/NjVFhinBBMz/gNsExgz6PxYh LgU4oCp5FxeU4S1U4RvXH7ma3U2duNcqw54xqZ5jyhK3JtceA1jCeRtPuViYpO0k NcdIn+ZdqCdzmDLQ9LaTYSgWLxJ4mhh0MR0LEdj7aQfXsHxb+TJrTbCush2JxtJv jfGJnl3Z89LHk2Rq/OamUkWK+EJcSDdW2L2DAfUHPbapLurv7rLS/8Knmg6ACFfE b9qKRrnHRMpqdS57Iax0/wtqohZf8rNTC6klnPfHw53u0e1MJK5TxG62T9lWPp/L KhfXNV7A1m8zPSFEUGWPqXV81FuaSrCvxGfM8nZDIAxa4+mzhquA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=GZnmsEEMZYlFDGw8+dwDcl54agz1EjZDIhsQRiC47oY=; b=USNuUPJJ ge2q6yiifUl7odG6MmI4YVaySDnKqxboT7XyAnhYDVmfcQAgkBrScUuSo0UYrY7A NJvfOE5WBK/ptG7SbwEReFK9YIxSOoBbJT+MLKNNlLHF5zzTUwvUk1Zn5xtAo+8x y5a2E2FrBHEftBC5EF4WmNtcthEAYVdgaYsiMhf/IleA7o3yZOFV3d5axgYnydqr MkHrPkZvZwLeYA4CgiK5VBIS+9OKF4r2ICRdXf0zSUP4bTXoyYsIbMgJP5gCmjxX lUmWyE3DK0glsoZOCbyR5O19It9raPWyOzYbmD2I3WS00p598vr7ZJnjKekuKWJ2 hfx/hO+qdV+Mhw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:PgFTWR-_P2NSt-XG9KZcyIG-gJIlkzkHtXrCIhC_p7dHi30FPRivtQ>
X-Sasl-enc: bVxfCTp5ORDOVHaSn63extw0Z8P8Zq1oEsoJmj4Bm54f 1498612029
Received: from [192.168.1.18] (cpe-124-188-19-231.hdbq1.win.bigpond.net.au [124.188.19.231]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 338DF7E766; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 21:07:07 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints-03.txt> (An HTTP Status Code for Indicating Hints) to Experimental RFC
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <20170627052928.GA5568@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:07:07 +1000
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <114853C3-36EC-426B-83D7-5101EB2A523D@mnot.net>
References: <149806437201.15854.12299810594896460001.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170627052928.GA5568@1wt.eu>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/pvWLZKGDxyLz_eRMXgpjs1uuTrk>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:07:13 -0000

Fair enough, but I wouldn't place requirements around this; just note it as something that might happen.


> On 27 Jun 2017, at 3:29 pm, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 09:59:32AM -0700, The IESG wrote:
>> 
>> The IESG has received a request from the Hypertext Transfer Protocol WG
>> (httpbis) to consider the following document: - 'An HTTP Status Code for
>> Indicating Hints'
>>  <draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints-03.txt> as Experimental RFC
> 
> I've just noticed that it's never mentionned that a client should be
> prepared to receive multiple 103 responses as any informational response
> (or at least I did not notice).
> 
> I think that indicating that multiple responses MAY be sent with complementary
> and/or possibly overlapping links, it may help grasp the overall principle
> and the relation between these informational responses and the final one.
> 
> The case I'm having in mind is the same as described in the PR comment, a
> server-side gateway could speculatively send a 103 with a few site-specific
> links while the server provides another 103 with some resource-specific
> links.
> 
> Willy

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email