Re:REST and long-running jobs (2014)
by vfaronov on Saturday December 01, 2018 @08:33AM
(#18576702)
RFC 7540 also defines an optional way for the client to signal whether it wishes the request to be processed asynchronously: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7240#section-4.1
[ Parent
| on HN ]
My first impression is that RFC7540 isn't appropriate for this use case, because it is proposed as a way for the client to signal optional/prefered behavior when said behavior is already made mandatory by the server.
To put it differently, why would it matter if a client POSTs with Prefer: respond-async if the server response will always be async? Whether that header is present or not, the HTTP response is already designed to always return a Location header.