Re: [E] Re: [PROPOSAL] Deprecate cqhv log field

[Susan Hinrichs <sh...@verizonmedia.com.INVALID>]

+1.  Fine with removing cqhv.

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 6:34 AM Sudheer Vinukonda
<su...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

>  +1
>     On Tuesday, August 11, 2020, 09:59:16 PM PDT, Masakazu Kitajo <
> maskit@apache.org> wrote:
>
>  I'd like to propose deprecating "cqhv" log field on 9.0.0.
>
> The documentation says "cqhv" logs "Client request HTTP version", however,
> it's been false for a long time because the value never be HTTP/2. What
> it actually logs is  "HTTP version that ATS internally uses". As some of
> you may know, ATS processes HTTP/2 requests by converting the requests to
> HTTP/1.1 internally. And "cqhv" logs the HTTP version after the conversion.
> So it's always HTTP/1.1 or maybe HTTP/1.0, and I guess most people don't
> care about the internal representation.
>
> And we have another tag field "cqpv" that logs "Client request protocol and
> version", which supports HTTP/2 and also HTTP/3. The value matches with the
> protocol and version you can see on the client side. This is probably what
> you really want to know.
>
> I'm not sure whether the current behavior of "cqhv" is intentional or not.
> Maybe we should have fixed it before we introduce "cqpv". Even so, I think
> we can deprecate "cqhv" since we already have "cqpv".
>
> I'm fine with keeping "cqhv" if some of you need it, but we should probably
> update the documentation in that case.
>
> Thanks,
> Masakazu
>