Re: Call for Adoption: Proxy Status

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.