- From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 02:30:23 -0700
- To: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
- Cc: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2014 09:30:49 UTC
imho, this is useful for tuning, not just debugging. And we've found that tuning is annoyingly difficult to get right. Obviously I want this, in case that wasn't common knowledge already :) -=R On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:17 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Apr 9, 2014, at 12:02 PM, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 2014-04-09, at 4:59 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> That only tells me if the connection is working, not if the resources > are not coming because of some server issue (like trouble connecting to a > back-end database) or because of flow control. > > > > Use the implementation-defined payload value. It's not portable but you > don't need portability for debugging. > > Looking at section 6.7 of -11 I don't see any implementation-defined > payload value, just some opaque data that the receiver should copy into its > response. > > Even if there was, I would be debugging my implementation against some > other implementation. Not against my own. > > Yoav > > >
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2014 09:30:49 UTC