- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 11:25:56 +1000
- To: Benno Overeinder <benno@NLnetLabs.nl>
- Cc: int-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-httpbis-proxy-status.all@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, last-call@ietf.org
Hi Benno, Thanks for the review. > On 25 Aug 2021, at 7:04 am, Benno Overeinder via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > > Section Abstract could provide a little more explanation, such as one > or two examples of how to use the error reporting (as explained in the > Introduction). I don't think adding examples to the abstract is helpful. > At the beginning of Section 2, should it be stated that Proxy-Status > HTTP Fields are only added to responses towards the user agent? So > explicitly state that an intermediary only adds Proxy-Status HTTP > Field towards the user agent and not towards the origin server? (It > is implied by the use of the word "response" of course and other text > in this section.) Proxy-Status is explicitly defined as a response field; this is how we denote that in HTTP. > In Section 2.1, the following paragraph is a bit confusing to me: > > Unless a Proxy Error Type specifies otherwise, the presences of error > often, but not always, indicates that response was generated by the > proxy, not the origin server or any other upstream server. For > example, a proxy might attempt to correct an error, or part of a > response might be forwarded before the error is encountered. > > I read the sentence "For example, a proxy might ..." as the situation > where the next intermediary will generate the error message. Is that > correct? Yes, that's not terribly clear. See: https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/315bcc7f Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2021 01:26:16 UTC