W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > May to June 2005

Re: HTTP 503 Clarification

From: Nic Ferrier <nferrier@tapsellferrier.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:08:59 +0100
To: "S. Mike Dierken" <mdierken@hotmail.com>
Cc: "Justin Chapweske" <justin@chapweske.com>, "Kumar C." <kumarc@jataayusoft.com>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, <www-talk@w3.org>
Message-ID: <877jgufwas.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk>

"S. Mike Dierken" <mdierken@hotmail.com> writes:

> I've always interpreted the HTTP as talking to a server about a resource -
> the response codes come from 'the server', so 'server unavailable' means the
> entire server. Why wouldn't a 40x response code be sufficient for the
> availability of individual resources?
> A system of "/servlet/search?query=foo" could be separated from
> "/servlet/login?user=foo" via a resource specific 40x or 307 (temporary
> redirect) response.

I don't think that's right. A 500 (Internal Server Error) for example
often applies to just one resource.


In answer to the original question: I think there is a deliberate
ambiguity because the distinctions can be ambiguous. HTTP does not
supply informatioon about servers, it supplys information about
resources identified by URLs.

Of course, always under HTTP is TCP (so far anyway) so you could do
something in TCP. TCP is about talking to an individual
server. Refusing the TCP connection is one way of saying the a server
is unavailable from a TCP point of view.


Nic Ferrier
Received on Thursday, 16 June 2005 10:11:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:28 GMT