Show HN: “HTTP 419 Never Gonna Give You Up” for bots

Re:Show HN: “HTTP 419 Never Gonna Give You Up” for bots by chrismorgan on Thursday October 28, 2021 @07:42PM (#29033505)

The thing that really disappoints me is that 418 I'm a Teapot isn’t registered—instead it’s reserved as “(Unused)”: https://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes/http-stat..., https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics.... As it stands, I suspect (as one that’s been involved in a couple and examined more back in 2013–2014) that most even vaguely recent HTTP libraries that have some kind of status code enum or constants defined take their data from the HTTP status codes registry, with a single exception for 418 I'm a Teapot.

As far as a 419 is concerned, I’d argue that 418 is already suitable anyway as a joke alternative to the more serious 429/503: “wp-admin.php? I’m not WordPress, I’m a teapot!” (Similar style to the joke about one cow warning another about the mad cow disease in the area, and the other responding that it’s not not worried because it’s a helicopter.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Show HN: “HTTP 419 Never Gonna Give You Up” for bots by nikeee on Thursday October 28, 2021 @08:09PM (#29033700)

418 is defined in HTCPCP, an _extension_ to HTTP. That's why I never understood why people use it in HTTP. So it makes sense that it's only reserved in HTTP.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Show HN: “HTTP 419 Never Gonna Give You Up” for bots by chrismorgan on Thursday October 28, 2021 @11:54PM (#29034983)

WebDAV is also an extension to HTTP. Its additional status codes and methods are added to the corresponding registries.

The entire raison d’être of such registries is to include any extensions; if you only cared about the core stuff, you wouldn’t define a registry.

[ Parent | on HN ]