Re: New Version Notification for draft-kazuho-early-hints-status-code-00.txt

2016-11-12 9:00 GMT+09:00 Alex Rousskov <>:
> On 11/11/2016 12:49 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Q: maybe we should create a Wiki page, summarizing implementation status
>> and bug reports?
> FWIW, based on the results I had access to, most of the HTTP proxies
> using our HTTP compliance test suite mishandled 1xx messages one way or
> the other. Even today, after all the tests and bug fixes, there is an
> outstanding Squid bug where an unfortunate timing of 1xx and other
> events lead to a crash. 1xx is evidently tricky to get right.
> This data point is not meant to support or combat the "let the bad
> implementations surface/suffer" argument. I am just reporting that many,
> possibly most proxies mishandle 1xx messages.

Thank you for the info.

I do not have a strong preference on whether if we should try to
rescue the broken implementations, but to me your report is
interesting in the fact that it shows the bounds of using header-based
negotiation to work-around such implementations.

HTTP headers are end-to-end by default. Therefore a request header for
negotiating the use of 103 would go through an intermediary incapable
of handling 1xx correctly. We might consider designating the header
used for negotiation as a hop-by-hop header, but I'd be scared of
using a new token to the connection header (for interoperability

In other words, using header-based negotiation for Early Hints only
limitedly improves interoperability.

PS. sorry if my response resumes the combat.

> HTH,
> Alex.

Kazuho Oku

Received on Sunday, 13 November 2016 12:37:02 UTC