- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:16:41 +0200
- To: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Bryce Nesbitt <bnesbitt@bepress.com>
I think it's a bit too detailed. How about just changing the first sentence to: The server is currently unable or unwilling to handle the request due to a temporary overloading, maintenance of the server, or rate limiting of the client. Cheers, On 10/02/2011, at 9:02 PM, Karl Dubost wrote: > > Le 10 févr. 2011 à 01:06, Mark Nottingham a écrit : >> Back to the original question here; should 503's definition be modified to explicitly allow rate limiting? >> >> Proposal -- add one paragraph: > > Putting the message in context > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-12#section-8.5.4 > > CURRENT TEXT > > 8.5.4. 503 Service Unavailable > > The server is currently unable to handle the request due > to a temporary overloading or maintenance of the server. > The implication is that this is a temporary condition > which will be alleviated after some delay. If known, the > length of the delay MAY be indicated in a Retry-After > header field. If no Retry-After is given, the client > SHOULD handle the response as it would for a 500 > response. > > | The meaning of "overloaded" is defined by and specific to > | the server, and can be selective (e.g., too many requests > | from a particular user). > > Note: The existence of the 503 status code does not > imply that a server must use it when becoming > overloaded. Some servers might wish to simply refuse > the connection. > > I would propose (but maybe too detailed for the group?). > > PROPOSAL for the additional text > > The meaning of "overloaded" is defined by and specific to > the server, and can be selective depending on the request > URI and its associated headers. For example, it doesn't > necessary mean a server malfunction but can be a notification > to inform the client that the server is used in excess for a > specific service (e.g., too many requests from a particular > user for an API). > > For date, I guess it is ok. As the server should be able to create a date. > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-08#section-9.3 > > 2. If the response status code conveys a server error, e.g. > 500 (Internal Server Error) or 503 (Service Unavailable), > and it is inconvenient or impossible to generate a valid > Date. > > > -- > Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/ > Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software > > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 27 March 2011 14:17:12 UTC