W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2017

Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints-03.txt> (An HTTP Status Code for Indicating Hints) to Experimental RFC

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:07:07 +1000
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Message-Id: <114853C3-36EC-426B-83D7-5101EB2A523D@mnot.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Fair enough, but I wouldn't place requirements around this; just note it as something that might happen.

> On 27 Jun 2017, at 3:29 pm, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 09:59:32AM -0700, The IESG wrote:
>> The IESG has received a request from the Hypertext Transfer Protocol WG
>> (httpbis) to consider the following document: - 'An HTTP Status Code for
>> Indicating Hints'
>>  <draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints-03.txt> as Experimental RFC
> I've just noticed that it's never mentionned that a client should be
> prepared to receive multiple 103 responses as any informational response
> (or at least I did not notice).
> I think that indicating that multiple responses MAY be sent with complementary
> and/or possibly overlapping links, it may help grasp the overall principle
> and the relation between these informational responses and the final one.
> The case I'm having in mind is the same as described in the PR comment, a
> server-side gateway could speculatively send a 103 with a few site-specific
> links while the server provides another 103 with some resource-specific
> links.
> Willy

Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 28 June 2017 01:07:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:15:03 UTC