Hi Oleg,

> I cant think of a good practical reason for keeping track of 1xx
> responses.
> 

<quote source="RFC 2616, Section 10.1, Page 56">
   Proxies MUST forward 1xx responses, unless the connection between the
   proxy and its client has been closed, or unless the proxy itself
   requested the generation of the 1xx response.
</quote>

That is the reason why 1xx responses need to be exposed, at least
in some cases. And if they are exposed, they should be treated like
other responses.

> How is the trace object supposed to be retrieved? Can we still keep
> HttpMethodExecutor stateless?
> 
I don't know yet. I had the idea of using separate trace objects only
yesterday, while typing in the mail. I guess I'd pass the trace object
along with the request to each object that would need it. Optional. 

> I would rather see the same effect achieved by using the observable
> pattern and the HttpFilter interface. The user may choose to keep track
> of Http response objects received by the filter
> 
Sounds like a good alternative.

> I REALLY like the idea of non-blocking requests. That would be quite a
> paradigm shift, though. This idea is definitely worth exploring. Could
> you add a section of this subject to the proposal draft in Wiki?
> 
If it can wait until the weekend, I'll do it. I'm currently a little
busy at work.

cheers,
  Roland
 

Reply via email to