A bit offtopic, but does anybody know what typesetting system was used to produce this document? It looks like troff manpages. Is that what is used for RFC documents as well? I love the oldschool look of it.
New HTTP Codes
11–20 of 84 posts
Re: New HTTP Codes
#12511 seems a little pointless -- browsers can treat it differently, but if the intermediate gateway intends to be malicious, then it won't return 511 anyway. The only useful thing I can see is avoiding accidents/attacks on the gateway compromising its clients.
Re: New HTTP Codes
#13A bit offtopic, but does anybody know what typesetting system was used to produce this document? It looks like troff manpages. Is that what is used for RFC documents as well? I love the oldschool look of it.
Re: New HTTP Codes
#14511 seems a little pointless -- browsers can treat it differently, but if the intermediate gateway intends to be malicious, then it won't return 511 anyway. The only useful thing I can see is avoiding accidents/attacks on the gateway compromising its clients.
My only concern is that 511 could be seen as legitimizing the practice of putting silly click-through terms-of-service roadblocks on free wi-fi (making it impossible for devices to connect without a human operating a web browser), but since people are doing it anyway we might as well support it properly.
Re: New HTTP Codes
#15I wish HTTP requests submitted time zone information.
Re: New HTTP Codes
#16511 seems a little pointless -- browsers can treat it differently, but if the intermediate gateway intends to be malicious, then it won't return 511 anyway. The only useful thing I can see is avoiding accidents/attacks on the gateway compromising its clients.
511 is aimed for the wifi networks that you find in hotels & airports where you have to pay money for access, or create an account.
Re: New HTTP Codes
#17These all seem immediately practical status codes that add semantics I've been wanting. Great! In particular I am happy about the 429 Too Many Requests header, as every time I've done rate throttling I've had to quibble over what code to actually send back.
Re: New HTTP Codes
#18511 seems a little pointless -- browsers can treat it differently, but if the intermediate gateway intends to be malicious, then it won't return 511 anyway. The only useful thing I can see is avoiding accidents/attacks on the gateway compromising its clients.
I don't think 511 is so much for security, I see it as being more focused on usability. For example if you have thick client program that talks to a backend server (perhaps for updates) and it receives a 511 response it can then tell the user that they need to login to the proxy (or just pop up a web browser for them).
Under this proposed system the OS can simply check for an appropriate HTTP response code, which makes life a little easier.
Re: New HTTP Codes
#19I wish HTTP requests submitted time zone information.
Just the current offset from UTC, or including the whole daylight savings malarkey?
Re: New HTTP Codes
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just the current offset from UTC, or including the whole daylight savings malarkey?
The actual Timezone would be great (something like Europe/London, etc.) Using the same format as the tz database: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tz_database#Names_of_time_zones