- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:09:51 +0200
- To: "Moore, Jonathan" <Jonathan_Moore@Comcast.com>
- Cc: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 07:51:30AM -0400, Moore, Jonathan wrote: > I think this is right that we might need to look at different status > codes here. What about a 500 (internal server error)? It seems like > the resource may have been put into a different state due to a > partially-completed operation, and the cache, being aware of a > potential change, ought to invalidate and re-establish the current > state. Please avoid abusing the 500 internal server error. It's monitored at a lot of places to explicitly indicate a server failure that, if repeated, requires human intervention. Probably that other more specific codes are appropriate. Regards, Willy
Received on Monday, 26 July 2010 12:10:29 UTC