- From: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:13:18 -0700
- To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, Jesse Wilson <jesse@swank.ca>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
the server should read until end_stream or discard with rst_stream On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:03 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On 1 July 2014 11:54, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com> wrote: >> > are you suggesting that as required or reasonable client behavior? >> >> Just reasonable. It's perfectly OK to complete the request, however >> long that takes. >> >> > The only firm bug there seems to be the server not sending updates. >> >> Definitely. But who gets the blame for the stall? > > > The server. Even if it doesn't actually use the request data, it needs to > send to /dev/null and send WINDOW_UPDATEs, until it gets to the point that > it can send the full response and send a RST_STREAM. I assert this to be > generally true for HTTP semantics, regardless of HTTP/1.X or HTTP/2 on the > wire.
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2014 19:13:45 UTC