W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: #535: No 1xx Status Codes

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:26:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXrq=mFyqzwcA3T0kHJYLqcb41DFXNrn_GPLezVygQv+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 15 July 2014 01:26, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> +1 for no 1xx.

I'll note here that we've pushed a number of other things to
extensions.  Things that have use cases even.  1xx uses - or the
examples of these that we actually have - tend to be things that map
to HTTP/2 framing layer constructs.

With extensions, I think that we can provide for the potential uses
that 1xx codes were previously used for.  And I think that enabling
the functionality in this way is architecturally cleaner than
propagating the specific mechanism from HTTP/1.1.  1xx fits the
HTTP/1.1 architecture, but not HTTP/2.

> +1 for removing trailers.

It has always been marginal.  I've not seen a whole lot of support for
retaining them, but no one has really pushed hard.  Maybe you can try.
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 17:26:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC