- From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 10:50:19 -0600
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 4/10/19 6:24 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-proxy-status-00 > > This email starts a call for adoption. Please reply to this email with > your thoughts, and state whether or not you believe the group should > adopt this document. Feedback is requested by *Wednesday, April 24*. I believe the scope of the document should be enlarged from the current "error details in the proxy-generated response" to something like "proxy status(es) when handling the message". After that, it should be adopted. IMHO, there is no good reason to restrict a generic "Proxy-Status" mechanism to proxy-generated errors, especially since existing proxies already use similar mechanisms to relay their state when forwarding messages (in addition to generating error responses). Typical uses include relaying caching state (initial lookup outcome, refresh activity, etc.) and proxy-specific transaction IDs (for correlating messages with proxy logs). Thank you, Alex.
Received on Sunday, 21 April 2019 16:50:46 UTC