W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: Warnings and SHOULD

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 20:41:16 +1000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <6AE3DA2E-1152-4BF5-B922-943A459E2D5E@mnot.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Hi Willy,

On 17/07/2011, at 3:43 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:

>> """
>>   A cache SHOULD append a Warning header field with the 110 warn-code
>>   (see Section 3.6) to stale responses.  Likewise, a cache SHOULD add
>>   the 112 warn-code to stale responses if the cache is disconnected.
>> """
> I see nothing in the text surrounding these parts which says that these 1xx
> responses may only be sent to HTTP/1.1 clients. We should be careful with
> this because the first iteration of 1.0 defines 1xx status codes as
> "Informational - Not used, but reserved for future use", thus it is likely
> that some clients will consider them as final status codes, and possibly
> invalid ones. Please note that RFC2616 did not appear to put any such
> reservation either.

We're talking about warn-codes here, not status codes...


Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2011 10:41:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:58 UTC