W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: 1xx response semantics

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 21:35:35 +0200
To: Brian Pane <brianp@brianp.net>
Cc: httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ppp6171bl31c5j18r7p1369q3pf730m13p@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Brian Pane wrote:
>Speaking of the 101/Upgrade mechanism... it seems fundamentally
>incompatible with request pipelining. If the first request in a
>pipeline indicates a willingness to upgrade to some non-HTTP protocol,
>and the server decides to switch to that other protocol upon receipt
>of the first request, the subsequent requests already in the pipeline
>may very well be syntactically invalid in the newly chosen protocol.
>
>Should the HTTP/1.1 spec thus prohibit the use of the Upgrade header
>in pipelined requests, or is the issue too obvious to document
>explicitly?

In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2010JulSep/0293.html
I mentioned this, I'm not sure if we track this under some issue number.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 19:35:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:44 GMT