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

Re: #300: Define non-final responses

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 00:12:21 +0200
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <cvm6271lme4u514dqjsoiq99jhjb5fma3j@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>I repeat:  101 is never the final response.  In order for the HTTP
>request to be completed, the upgraded protocol MUST respond to the
>initial request after the switch is complete.  There are NO EXCEPTIONS.
>If the final response is not received, an HTTP error has occurred
>even if the connection is no longer being run in HTTP.  What HTTP
>does not define is how, not if, that final response is sent.

How would a tool like Wireshark tell whether there was a response to the
initial request? It might be able to if the response was more than zero
bytes long, but I am not aware of a requirement to respond with at least
one byte. I might agree with you semantically that the "upgraded-to"
protocol is supposed to offer a response to the request that lead to the
upgrade, but I do not see how that translates to "bits on the wire".
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 Sunday, 17 July 2011 22:12:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:58 UTC