W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1997

Re: 1xx Clarification

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 22:24:44 PDT
Message-Id: <334C799C.6A45@parc.xerox.com>
To: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com, "Roy T. Fielding (E-mail)" <fielding@ics.uci.edu>
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3003
Yaron Goland wrote:

> It seems a clarification is in order. As such I propose that the
> following paragraph be added to the end of section 10.1:
> 1xx responses MAY be sent independently of requests. Clients MUST always
> be able to accept 1xx responses and MUST ignore any 1xx response they do
> not understand. In addition, proxies MUST pass through any 1xx response
> they do not understand.

I'm really uneasy about this. I can imagine an implementation that
just doesn't read from the connection at all unless there's some
request outstanding, and a server that sends a 1xx 'response' [sic] 
without a pending request might wind up with stuff stuck in buffers 
that never gets read. 

Seems like it puts unnecessary requirements on implementations,
and it doesn't seem justified. Just what ARE these unanticpated

Received on Wednesday, 9 April 1997 23:02:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:19 UTC