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

RE: Proposed resolution for the STATUS100 issue

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 12:03:05 -0700
Message-Id: <11352BDEEB92CF119F3F00805F14F4850332A724@RED-44-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
To: "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>, Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Agreed. I really think we need to add language to 10.1 that makes it
clear that
1) Proxies should be passing through all 1xx messages
2) That multiple 1xx messages may be sent between the time that a
request is made and non-1xx response is sent.
3) That clients, at minimum, MUST be able to ignore any incoming 1xx
responses.

	Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Roy T. Fielding [SMTP:fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu]
> Sent:	Friday, July 18, 1997 4:37 AM
> To:	Jeffrey Mogul
> Cc:	http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> Subject:	Re: Proposed resolution for the STATUS100 issue 
> 
> >How about this?
> >
> >   o  A client MUST be prepared to accept one or more 100 (Continue)
> >      status messages prior to a regular response, even if the client
> >      does not expect a 100 (Continue) status message.
> 
> This should be the case for 1xx responses in general, so the
> requirement should also be in general.
> 
> ....Roy
Received on Friday, 18 July 1997 12:08:06 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:32:48 EDT