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

Re: #297: p1 7.2.4: retrying requests

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:40:40 +0200
Message-ID: <4EA56AD8.10901@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2011-07-19 15:22, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/297>
>
> On 24/06/2011, at 4:25 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
>> My current thinking is to life the retry-specific text out of 7.1.4 into a new section, possibly adding advice (along the lines you mention).
>
> I think that moving this out to a separate section is a largely editorial change. However, I feel that we should also downgrade the SHOULD to a MAY retry when the connection is closed; there isn't any reason to require a retry, and software might have good reasons not to. Also, there are a lot of implementations out there that don't retry.
>
> Make sense?

Yes.

Make that a sibling of 7.1.4? ("Retrying Requests"?)

> Also...
>
>> I'm inclined to propose removing section 7.2.4 altogether, because it's very specific to a certain kind of request (one with a body where the connection drops to a proxy or HTTP/1.0 server, when there isn't an Expect: 100-continue header), and doing so can result in the server seeing a non-idempotent request being repeated multiple times, which is bad.
>
>
> Any objection to this?

No, I think it makes a lot of sense.

Is this something we need to mention in the "Changes from RFC 2616" 
section, though?


Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 24 October 2011 13:41:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:49 GMT