W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: New Status Code -- 2xx Greedy Hotel?

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:53:37 +0000
Message-Id: <735C19FB-2BFB-4A39-80A7-9C10D1EED14A@mnot.net>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>

Hmm, 3xx doesn't seem right; there might be temporary redirects along  
the way (indeed, most of these sorts of things already use them);  
it's the status code of the place where you end up that's interesting.

5xx implies server-side error, so that's not appropriate (unless you  
consider their requirement for money an error!)

402 is reserved, and I think the original intent was making a payment  
to the origin server, not to the folks who give you the network to  
get there...

On 15/03/2007, at 2:47 PM, Mark Baker wrote:

> Sounds more like a 3xx, perhaps even 303?
> The hard part is getting these proxies to support it, of course.
> Mark.
> On 3/15/07, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>> After being in hotels for a few weeks, I'm starting to wonder whether
>> a new 2xx HTTP status code could be defined whose semantic is "This
>> isn't what you asked for, but here's some information about how to
>> get network access so you can eventually get it."
>> 2xx so that browsers will display it. AFAICT, they do; or at least,
>> Safari and Firefox do (see <http://www.mnot.net/test/222.asis>). IE?
>> 4xx might be more appropriate, but I despair of "friendly" error
>> messages. (thought they could be padded, I suppose).
>> A new status code so that feed aggregators, automated clients, etc.
>> can differentiate what they asked for from your hotel / conference
>> centre / etc. asking for cash in order to get network access, and not
>> get horribly messed up as a result.
>> It would also be useful in those cases where you get redirected
>> somewhere to login and get a cookie for authentication; e.g., Yahoo!,
>> Google, Amazon, etc. Same situation, but slightly different use case.
>> Thoughts?
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/

Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2007 14:53:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:41 UTC