W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: I-D Action:draft-nottingham-http-stale-if-error-01.txt

From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 14:41:24 -0700
Message-ID: <2CE77EA87C214B02BE1BBB9A43A11FE3@T60>
To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Yeah. Anybody else want to weigh in pro or con on this?

"In this context, an error is any situation which would result in a
500, 502, 503 or 504 HTTP response status code being returned."

It seems wrong to limit this to these four status codes. Why not have the 
server indicate that stale responses are okay when it returns the error 
response? In other words, instead of returning stale-if-error=XXX on a 
successful response, it would return it in the 5xx responses. Alternatively, 
allow the stale-if-error subfield to list the status codes for which a stale 
response could be returned.

Also, I think that the specification needs to explicitly mention that a 
warning should be added when a cache returns a stale response due to a 
back-end error.

Received on Saturday, 10 May 2008 21:42:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:45 UTC