W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Some general SPDY feedback / questions

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:37:15 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbcKKedmhNJe-nLz531wrfLW=zV6SLyvy1Ua6Vx8USQjuQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@rackspace.com>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Jul 18, 2012 2:35 PM, "Roberto Peon" <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 3. How are Informational 1xx Status Codes handled? The current SPDY
draft does not appear to support "provisional responses".

Thank you for the reference to the thread. After reading through it one
thing became obvious: while it would likely not be difficult to provide
support for a 100-continue like mechanism within spdy, the protocols
current design would essentially require a suboptimal hack in order to
retain existing http/1.1 semantics and preserve spdy-to-http1.1 pass
through or would require that we design a new similar mechanism, optimized
for spdy that changes an aspect of http/1.1 semantics.

As Mark  has pointed out recently, however, our job here currently is to
only define a new transport for http and not to change existing http
semantics. So i am at a bit of a loss as to what the charter will let us do
in this case.

Mark... any guidance?
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2012 06:37:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 1 October 2015 05:36:54 UTC