Re: Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-httpbis-proxy-status-05

Hi Magnus,

Thanks for the review. See:
  https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1591

Happy to continue the discussion here or over there.

Cheers,


> On 4 Aug 2021, at 6:48 pm, Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Magnus Westerlund
> Review result: Ready with Issues
> 
> This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
> ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
> primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
> authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
> discussion list for information.
> 
> When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
> review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
> tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.
> 
> I found not transport related issues, only some clarity issues related to extra
> parameters and their registration.
> 
> 1. Section 2:
> Depending on the deployment, this might be a product or service name (e.g.,
> ExampleProxy or "Example CDN"), a hostname ("proxy-3.example.com"), an IP
> address, or a generated string.
> 
> Is really an IP address a good identifier for intermediary? Or is the case that
> there some that doesn't have a better identity than its IP? And should there be
> additional security considerations about including IP addresses in the header?
> 
> 2. Section 2.1.1:
> 
> Proxy Error Types can also define any number of extra parameters for use with
> that type. Their use, like all parameters, is optional. As a result, if an
> extra parameter is used with a Proxy Error Type for which it is not defined, it
> will be ignored.
> 
> It is not obvious how these extra parameters are to be encoded.
> 
> If we take the example of DNS Error, how would that look like in an example?
> 
> HTTP/1.1 502 Bad Gateway
> Proxy-Status: SomeReverseProxy; error=dns_error; rcode="123 something";
> info-code=3454
> 
> Can you please clarify this aspect?
> 
> 3. Section 3:
> 
> Shouldn't the extra parameters in Section 2.3 be registered in the HTTP
> Proxy-Status Parameters registry? If not can you clarify how they are handled?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus Westerlund
> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

Received on Thursday, 5 August 2021 01:02:37 UTC