- From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 17:23:54 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-proxy-status@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:13:17AM +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Hi Ben! > > Thanks for the comments. Responses below. > > > On 13 Oct 2021, at 6:37 am, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > > > > Thank you for the updates in the -07; they look good. > > > > Two remarks on the new content in the -07: > > > > In Section 2.1.1 the prose accompanying the example that uses > > a 429 response code mentions "the reverse proxy", but the > > Proxy-Status list members in the example have been changed to > > no longer mention "SomeReverseProxy" in favor of an example hostname > > specific to a given deployment. > > See: > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/0bb14623e07 > > > The template for the proxy error types registry (Section 2.4), as > > well as the initial registry contents in Sections 2.3.x, use the > > phrase "Only generated by intermediaries". My apologies if I made > > this comment already and it was discarded, but that phrasing is > > easy to misread as saying that the *error* was only generated by > > intermediaries, when the intent is that the (possibly partial) > > response content was only generated by intermediaries. So I'd consider > > adding "response", for "Response only generated by intermediaries" > > (or similar) to forestall such confusion. > > Thanks, I was uncomfortable with that phrasing and I think you've pointed out why. It's somewhat unwieldy (and was before too), but at least now accurate. See: > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/8872f7477ad44 > > If no one sees any immediate issues with those changes, I'll submit a new revision shortly. > > Cheers and thanks again Ben, Works for me. Thanks! -Ben
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2021 00:24:21 UTC