There was a previous issue related to the use of a 4xx status code for fail which has now been closed. There seemed to be agreement that returning the status code of a dependent service could be useful but I'd like to agree with the original premise of that issue - an "HTTP Client Error" should not be returned from a healthcheck. The offending text is in section 3.1 and reads:
For "fail" status, HTTP response code in the 4xx-5xx range MUST be used.
The RFC that defines HTTP Status Codes contradicts the use of a 4xx as an indication of a server errors in section 10.4 - it's probably still appropriate for actual client errors (e.g. the client trying to access the healthcheck doesn't have permission).
There was a previous issue related to the use of a 4xx status code for fail which has now been closed. There seemed to be agreement that returning the status code of a dependent service could be useful but I'd like to agree with the original premise of that issue - an "HTTP Client Error" should not be returned from a healthcheck. The offending text is in section 3.1 and reads:
The RFC that defines HTTP Status Codes contradicts the use of a 4xx as an indication of a server errors in section 10.4 - it's probably still appropriate for actual client errors (e.g. the client trying to access the healthcheck doesn't have permission).