Skip to content

Update tracestate example for header format #585

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
JoakimBrannstrom wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update tracestate example for header format #585

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion spec/20-http_request_header_format.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -320,7 +320,7 @@ Example: `vendorname1=opaqueValue1,vendorname2=opaqueValue2`

Tracing tools are not supposed to add the same header multiple times. For example, if a vendor name is Congo and a trace started in their system and then went through a system named Rojo and later returned to Congo, the `tracestate` value would not be:

`congo=congosFirstPosition,rojo=rojosFirstPosition,congo=congosSecondPosition`
`congo=congosSecondPosition,rojo=rojosFirstPosition,congo=congosFirstPosition`

@zacharycmontoya zacharycmontoya Jul 6, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't see a reason to change this tracestate value, since the one several lines later in the doc is the correct one. This line is supposed to show a wrong example, so the previous value works just as well as the newly proposed value

@JoakimBrannstrom JoakimBrannstrom Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know that this example shows an invalid tracestate, but it was confusing when I read it, since the order of creation should be from right to left.
I believe it would show the problem in a better way by making the suggested change.

As a side-note, accepting PR's (if they are not flat out wrong) builds more engagement and makes the community stronger :)


Instead, the entry would be rewritten to only include the most recent position:
`congo=congosSecondPosition,rojo=rojosFirstPosition`
Expand Down