31:
408:
I've removed this as I couldn't find even an unreliable source anywhere. The only references in google to "http error 443" were from fake SEO sites that create bogus response pages to any search term featuring the word "error". I think the original entry must be based on a confusion with TCP port
284:
If this were to be added in some future standard, I would suggest that the official definition be merely a "local definition"; similarly with 419 and 421 (below). In other words, it should be valid but its precise meaning (beyond "error") may be left up to the individual server. I use "420" as an
450:
Recently, there have been attempts to delete a
Twitter-specific status code while retaining various Nginx-specific and Microsoft-specific status codes. I can see an argument for deleting all status codes that are not found in the RFCs, but I see no justification for only deleting the non-standard
423:
I don't know what this code is but this comes from a real error. I typed xxx to remove the real values (confidentiality). Indeed, the 443 is from port The project xxx:1.0 (/xxx/pom.xml) has 1 error Non-resolvable parent POM: Could not transfer artifact xxx.xxx.xxx.maven:xxx-master:pom:1.0
153:
RFC's are NOT official unless they are actually approved and accepted into the standards. They are actually proposals, thus their name "request for comments." Granted, many if not most RFCs do become part of some standard. A good analogy is RFCs are to standards as regulations are to statutes
215:). For example, we know that Apache can generate a 200 or a 404 and that there exists no error (internal or in the client request) that will cause Apache to return a 402 or 451, but is there a list somewhere of all the status codes that Apache is capable of returning?
264:
implements code 420 as "you are being rate-limited ". This seems like a fairly valid use for HTTP response codes, but it is not a formal extension. However, they also named it "Enhance Your Calm" and the choice of number seems to be a reference to
353:
that explains the codes being grouped by overall meaning, thus also giving an explanation for why there are section headings here. It also explained that a minimal web client must process error codes, but may only work from this leading digit.
304:
Why was the edit to change 419 and 420, and add 421, to say "Local definition" reversed? As there is no official definition in any RFC but these codes are in use at certain sites, "Local definition" seems to be the most reasonable explanation.
535:
A recent edit introduced several new entries to the list, 452-463, and 551, with no mention of source or reference. A brief search for any instances of any of these being used revealed nothing, does anybody have a source for these?
488:
The reason it should be removed (I've tried myself, but people always foolishly restore it) is that it is not an HTTP status code (as conventionally understood), but something invented by one specific proprietary Web site.
372:
Your list is no different than the Table of
Contents which is in roughly the same spot. The TOC has the added benefit of being usefully linked to each section. Please explain why the article needs two TOCs?
511:
And of course, any Web programmer can return any old custom status they like; it would be ridiculous and futile to try to list them all. This is just a bias by editors who are
Twitter fans, I suppose.
218:
I have been looking at various Apache .htaccess examples and tutorials, and a surprising number of them have an ErrorDocument set for 402, and a lot of them have an ErrorDocument set for
127:
Well, the W3C link explicitely says "rfc2616" in it. And the lead for this article notes the official (excluding non-standardized ones) are from the RFC. So the RFC it is, right? --
180:
To become an IETF RFC, a document has been approved by the IESG. It's as official as you get with IETF specs (but there are some differences still, see RFC 2026).
635:
I'm happy to make the edits to reflect this but unfortunately I could not see how RFC 7321 was linked in the introductory text. Any help would be appreciated.
466:
I would guess that the reason behind removing "420 Enhance Your Calm" would be it's not generated by the server itself; rather, by twitter's framework. Should
285:
error response to detected malicious web server hack attempts at my server, and on my error list web page, document it as "Malicious Web Robot
Response (
428:): Connect to repo.maven.apache.org:443 failed: Connection timed out and 'parent.relativePath' points at wrong local POM @ line 4, column 10 -: -->
86:
81:
76:
64:
59:
269:. Should this be added to the list of codes? I note that we have a number of unofficial Microsoft extensions to the response code block listed.
136:
RFC's are official I belive, as the w3c only standardizes (X)HTML, CSS and stuff like that. the actual protocol is all done in RFC's I think.
543:
490:
331:
306:
290:
155:
512:
632:
3.1. 401 Unauthorized ...........................................6 3.2. 407 Proxy
Authentication Required ..........................6
626:
4.1. 206 Partial
Content .......................................10 4.4. 416 Range Not Satisfiable .................................15
620:
4.1. 304 Not
Modified ..........................................18 4.2. 412 Precondition Failed ...................................19
410:
209:
We have a bunch of status codes listed, but it isn't clear which ones can actually occur on widely-used web servers (there is a list
270:
614:
Furthermore, the following status coded are not defined in RFC 7231, yet the rest of the article does not make this fact known.
663:; you don't need to do anything other than specify the name. So you can just type it out and not worry about the linkingĀ :) ā
409:
number 443, which is often shown in error messages of the format "(DNS name or IP address):443 uses an invalid certificate".
47:
17:
211:
741:
99:
Which is REALLY the official source of HTTP response codes? w3c? (as linked to in the article) Or is it the RFC? (
38:
752:
494:
310:
294:
159:
547:
335:
608:
516:
274:
414:
389:
362:
266:
108:
435:
539:
472:
response codes be listed here, or just ones generated by http servers(regardless of RFC compliance)?
393:
327:
431:
756:
748:
709:
696:
692:
671:
646:
642:
566:
551:
520:
498:
479:
460:
456:
439:
418:
397:
366:
339:
314:
298:
278:
249:
245:
234:
230:
225:
TLDR: looking for a list of status codes that Apache, IIS, nginx. etc. are capable of returning. --
189:
163:
140:
131:
120:
558:
181:
112:
562:
358:
185:
116:
706:
668:
660:
261:
701:
Not immediate thoughts. You're probably better asking the editor who reverted the change. ā
716:
473:
378:
374:
688:
654:
638:
598:"Unless otherwise stated, the status code is part of the HTTP/1.1 standard (RFC 7231)."
452:
241:
226:
128:
137:
604:
357:
Should we include an explanation of the overall grouping of HTTP response codes?
206:
I am looking for some information that may be of use for citations on this page.
702:
678:
664:
385:
289:?)", with the same implication of the meaning of "420" as in the comment above.
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
107:
HTTP status codes need to be registered, IANA maintains the registry at
737:
425:
109:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/http-status-codes/http-status-codes.xml
100:
381:
721:
is there a reason for non-acceptance of the aforementioned edit?
324:
Could we get an "In
Popular Culture" section in this article?
25:
740:
9xx codes (or mention the range in total) as described on
451:
status codes used by organizations that you don't like. --
350:
Scalhotrod has now twice removed an addition to the lead
576:
Given that the update to RFC 2616 is split into 5 RFCs
684:
351:
611:. This appears to be a better reference document.
661:automatically generate a link to the RFC page
8:
537:
736:Hi, you might want to append a pile of
222:, including my personal favorite, 418.
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
7:
426:https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2
101:http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt
687:, but was reverted. Any thoughts?
24:
742:oclc.org/support/services/ezproxy
220:every status code Knowledge lists
29:
18:Talk:List of HTTP status codes
1:
521:23:45, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
440:12:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
732:Proprietary 9xx from EZproxy
398:01:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
367:18:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
340:06:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
659:The phrase "RFC XXXX" will
235:14:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
190:08:17, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
121:08:18, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
772:
757:08:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
710:19:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
697:18:55, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
672:10:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
647:09:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
499:03:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
480:20:09, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
461:17:07, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
279:14:44, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
567:21:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
552:20:10, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
419:08:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
315:22:04, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
299:22:36, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
250:04:09, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
240:(Sound of Crickets...) --
164:22:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
141:22:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
346:Explanation of groupings
132:20:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
267:420 in cannabis culture
557:I have removed those.
202:Possible / Impossible?
572:New RFCs for HTTP/1.1
446:Undiscussed deletions
42:of past discussions.
609:status code registry
287:What are you smoking
600:is now incorrect.
477:
320:In Popular Culture
554:
542:comment added by
475:
424:from/to central (
330:comment added by
92:
91:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
763:
720:
682:
658:
531:452-463, and 551
342:
73:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
771:
770:
766:
765:
764:
762:
761:
760:
734:
714:
683:Attempted edit
676:
652:
633:
627:
621:
607:and links to a
574:
533:
448:
406:
348:
325:
322:
258:
204:
97:
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
769:
767:
749:PerfektesChaos
733:
730:
729:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
631:
625:
619:
594:
593:
590:
587:
584:
581:
573:
570:
544:109.156.231.62
532:
529:
528:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
504:
503:
502:
501:
491:86.159.197.174
483:
482:
447:
444:
405:
402:
401:
400:
347:
344:
332:216.175.84.179
321:
318:
307:71.105.105.145
303:
291:71.106.210.230
283:
257:
254:
253:
252:
203:
200:
199:
198:
197:
196:
195:
194:
193:
192:
171:
170:
169:
168:
167:
166:
156:71.106.210.230
146:
145:
144:
143:
124:
123:
96:
93:
90:
89:
84:
79:
74:
67:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
768:
759:
758:
754:
750:
745:
743:
739:
731:
718:
713:
712:
711:
708:
704:
700:
699:
698:
694:
690:
686:
680:
675:
674:
673:
670:
666:
662:
656:
651:
650:
649:
648:
644:
640:
636:
630:
624:
618:
615:
612:
610:
606:
601:
599:
591:
588:
585:
582:
579:
578:
577:
571:
569:
568:
564:
560:
555:
553:
549:
545:
541:
530:
522:
518:
514:
513:86.179.191.90
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
500:
496:
492:
487:
486:
485:
484:
481:
478:
471:
470:
465:
464:
463:
462:
458:
454:
445:
443:
441:
437:
433:
429:
427:
421:
420:
416:
412:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
382:banjo playing
380:
376:
371:
370:
369:
368:
364:
360:
355:
352:
345:
343:
341:
337:
333:
329:
319:
317:
316:
312:
308:
301:
300:
296:
292:
288:
281:
280:
276:
272:
268:
263:
255:
251:
247:
243:
239:
238:
237:
236:
232:
228:
223:
221:
216:
214:
213:
207:
201:
191:
187:
183:
179:
178:
177:
176:
175:
174:
173:
172:
165:
161:
157:
154:(i.e. laws).
152:
151:
150:
149:
148:
147:
142:
139:
135:
134:
133:
130:
126:
125:
122:
118:
114:
110:
106:
105:
104:
102:
94:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
72:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
747:Greetings --
746:
735:
637:
634:
628:
622:
616:
613:
602:
597:
595:
575:
556:
538:āĀ Preceding
534:
468:
467:
449:
430:
422:
411:82.6.102.118
407:
377:- Just your
359:Andy Dingley
356:
349:
326:ā Preceding
323:
302:
286:
282:
259:
224:
219:
217:
210:
208:
205:
98:
70:
43:
37:
386:drag racing
271:86.14.76.99
262:Twitter API
36:This is an
717:Scalhotrod
442:Caperutxa
689:Darrhiggs
655:Darrhiggs
639:Darrhiggs
629:RFC 7235
623:RFC 7233
617:RFC 7232
596:the line
476:akoimeexx
453:Guy Macon
432:Caperutxa
242:Guy Macon
227:Guy Macon
95:Official?
87:ArchiveĀ 6
82:ArchiveĀ 5
77:ArchiveĀ 4
71:ArchiveĀ 3
65:ArchiveĀ 2
60:ArchiveĀ 1
603:RFC7231
592:RFC 7235
589:RFC 7234
586:RFC 7233
583:RFC 7232
580:RFC 7231
540:unsigned
404:Code 443
375:SChotrod
328:unsigned
256:Code 420
129:Interiot
738:EZproxy
605:defines
559:Reschke
379:average
182:Reschke
138:Bawolff
113:Reschke
39:archive
679:Me and
394:(Talk)
390:cowboy
16:<
753:talk
693:talk
685:here
643:talk
563:talk
548:talk
517:talk
495:talk
457:talk
436:talk
415:talk
396:ā®į¦āŗ
392:...
363:talk
336:talk
311:talk
295:talk
275:talk
260:The
246:talk
231:talk
212:here
186:talk
160:talk
117:talk
707:and
669:and
469:any
755:)
744:.
703:me
695:)
665:me
645:)
565:)
550:)
519:)
497:)
459:)
438:)
417:)
388:,
384:,
373:--
365:)
338:)
313:)
297:)
277:)
248:)
233:)
188:)
162:)
119:)
111:.
103:)
751:(
719::
715:@
705:_
691:(
681::
677:@
667:_
657::
653:@
641:(
561:(
546:(
515:(
493:(
474:-
455:(
434:(
413:(
361:(
334:(
309:(
293:(
273:(
244:(
229:(
184:(
158:(
115:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.