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

Re: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-new-status-00.txt

From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 07:08:37 +0300
Message-ID: <4E49ED45.7080408@gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
16.08.2011 2:47, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> On 14/08/2011, at 3:03 PM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>
>> Hello Mark,
>>
>> I also think APPSAWG can be appropriate for discussion and processing this document.
>>
>> I recall the existence of non-standard 444 status code, which stands for 'No Response' and is currently used by nginx servers.  Should we standardize it?  I'll describe briefly.  I suppose the semantics are "due to some reasons the server has chosen to close the connection and return no response to the user"; thus the body in 444 response must be empty.  444 responses must not be stored by the caches, and receiving one should not prevent the user from retrying opening the connection once more.  444 responses should not be generated by intermediaries; they can only be given by the origin servers.
> What's the advantage over just closing the connection?

Well, Wikipedia claims that such code may be useful as a "deterrent for 
malware" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTTP_status_codes), 
giving no other information.  I don't actually know how exactly it works 
for this reason, but I suspect that when the origin server has detected 
that it is infected by some malware, and its policy is to immediately 
disconnect from the Net, and, respectively, all UAs connected, it will 
choose to close the connection by 444 response, giving no other 
information.  In other words, 444 is useful in the case of "emergency", 
when something happens to server.

Also, 444 is very similar to FTP 421 code, that is defined as follows:

>           421 Service not available, closing control connection.
>               This may be a reply to any command if the service knows it
>               must shut down.

Similar code exists in SMTP 
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-4.2.2):

>     421<domain>  Service not available, closing transmission channel
>        (This may be a reply to any command if the service knows it must
>        shut down)

[Hmm, the code number, and the description are suspiciously 
similar...:-) ]  So I believe such code may also be useful in HTTP.

>
>
>> Another widely-used (and probably even more often than 444) is 509, 'Bandwidth Limit Exceeded'.  This is returned when a server or an intermediary encounters the situation when due to the limitation of the bandwidth it is unable to process client's request or server's response, respectively.  No caching is allowed as well; "Retry-After" may be present.  I think we can standardize this status code as well.
> Hmm. I could see this as a server-side version of 'limit exceeded' I suppose... interesting.

Yes, these two are quite contiguous.

So I'm looking forward to new version of your draft.

Mykyta Yevstifeyev

>
>
>> Mykyta Yevstifeyev
>>
>>> FYI; a few new status codes.
>>>
>>> I suspect this might end up in the APPAWG, since it's out of scope for HTTPBIS.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>>> From:
>>> internet-drafts@ietf.org
>>>
>>>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-new-status-00.txt
>>>> Date: 13 August 2011 5:26:19 PM AEST
>>>> To:
>>> i-d-announce@ietf.org
>>>
>>>> Reply-To:
>>> internet-drafts@ietf.org
>>>
>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>>>
>>>> 	Title           : Additional HTTP Status Codes
>>>> 	Author(s)       : Mark Nottingham
>>>>                           Roy T. Fielding
>>>> 	Filename        : draft-nottingham-http-new-status-00.txt
>>>> 	Pages           : 8
>>>> 	Date            : 2011-08-13
>>>>
>>>>    This document specifies additional HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP)
>>>>    status codes for a variety of common situations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-http-new-status-00.txt
>>>
>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>
>>>> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
>>>>
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nottingham-http-new-status-00.txt
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>>>>
>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
>>>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>>
>>>> Internet-Draft directories:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>>>
>>>> or
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mark Nottingham
>>> http://www.mnot.net/
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2011 04:08:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:46 GMT