W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: trailers and pseudo-headers

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 10:14:01 +0200
Message-ID: <53B3BF49.9030207@gmx.de>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2014-07-02 10:02, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <53B3B835.80807@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes:
>> On 2014-07-02 09:35, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>> In message <53B3AD3A.8020307@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes:
>>>
>>>> The reason I ask is that people might start putting ":status" into a
>>>> trailer and expect that to have an effect (it would be nice to have that
>>>> feature, but it wouldn't map to 1.1...).
>>>
>>> It would also be pretty pointless:  It would just shift the buffering
>>> responsibility from the server to the client.
>>
>> What I meant is: an *additional* :status (such as in first claiming
>> everything is ok -- 200, then start streaming and failing, and then send
>> a 500 in the trailers).
>
> And if that is a risk, the client can do only one thing:  Buffer the
> response, until it is sure what the :status will be.

Hm? That would imply buffering all responses before displaying them?
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2014 08:14:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:08 UTC