- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:34:44 -0700
- To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I suspect these things would just annoy users with unreliable network connections. Wouldn't you be frustrated if a web page you were looking at suddenly went blank just because your WiFi cut out? Adam On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote: > what about pop a warning, or clear the page? > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com> > To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com> > Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> > Sent: 20/03/2012 6:02:34 p.m. > Subject: Re: Bad browser behaviour? >> >> It's probably impossible for browsers to do anything else given that >> browsers incrementally render chunk-transfered content. For example, >> if the network were to hang at that point (rather than drop), they'd >> do the same thing. >> >> Adam >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi all >>> >>> we're seeing some (IMO) undesirable behaviour for all tested current >>> browsers (we tested FF, Chrome, IE and Opera). >>> >>> It relates to abortive closes on chunked transfers. In this case, I'm >>> talking about a server close prior to the final 0 chunk. >>> >>> All the browsers we tested ignore this and display the content with no >>> warning whatsoever. >>> >>> For our proxy to treat it as an abortive close is therefore a problem in >>> our >>> customers' eyes. >>> >>> So what's the deal? Should we allow this behaviour in the spec? Or >>> should >>> browser vendors be encouraged to break the page / download? >>> >>> Isn't it a potential security issue? >>> >>> Adrien >>> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2012 05:35:45 UTC