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

Re: #300: Define non-final responses

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 10:50:10 +0100
Message-ID: <4EB3B552.7040701@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2011-10-26 01:52, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> On 25/10/2011, at 3:41 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2011-07-18 08:05, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> I think we're hitting diminishing returns here, and possibly approaching the angels dancing on the pins.
>>> If someone has a proposal for a text change that they think will represent consensus, great.
>>> In the meantime, I don't see any pushback on the proposed resolution, as it affects p1.
>>> ...
>> So what is the proposed resolution?
> The original e-mail said:
>> 1xx responses are non-final; i.e., the underlying model is that for each request, there are 0 to many non-final responses, and exactly one final response.
>> This should be made explicit at a high level; it's implied by the definition of 1xx, but never really spelled out anywhere.
> ... so it needs some text, probably somewhere in or around p1 2.1 "Client/Server Messaging".
> Do you want to take a stab at it, or would you like a textual proposal?
> ...

Mark made a proposal in 
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/300#comment:6>. I 
rephrased it minimally, and the new paragraph would then read:

    Note that 1xx responses (Section 7.1 of [Part2]) are not final;
    therefore, a server can send zero or more 1xx responses, followed by
    exactly one final response (with any other status code).


Feedback appreciated, Julian
Received on Friday, 4 November 2011 09:50:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:43:26 UTC