W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 2001

Re: Whatever happenned to HTTP 1.1 Pipelining

From: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:36:22 -0700 (PDT)
To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.20.0104271034120.20876-100000@alive.znep.com>
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 dillon@hns.com wrote:

>      Thankyou for digging that up, but does it
> mean that by a server SHOULD or MUST use self-defined message
> lengths? This doesn't seem to give the browser author any assurance
> that his pipelined requests won't be aborted by a premature connection
> close due to a no CONTENT-LENGTH response.

Then they have to resend the requsts to which they have not received 
responses.  This is why only idempotent requests can be pipelined.

> 
>      Seems to me that you only pipeline after you've gotton one
> request through a connection because you don't know whether the
> other end supports persistent connections. After that first request, which
> handles the negotiation, you'd like to be able to pipeline with worry about the
> pipeline being
> cut off.

You always have to worry about the possibility that the pipeline is cut
off.
Received on Friday, 27 April 2001 18:37:45 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:33:43 EDT