Re: 1xx response semantics

On Jul 4, 2011, at 11:13 PM, 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 ?

Oh, for crying out loud.

101 is an interim response.  The first response in the new protocol
after an Upgrade is the response to the first request.  If I send an
Upgrade to waka on an HTTP GET request, the waka server will respond
with 101 in HTTP and then the equivalent of a 200 response in waka.
There is no second request.  That's the whole point in including a
zero-latency bootstrap upgrade within HTTP.

....Roy

Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 18:37:32 UTC