On Mar 6, 2008, at 7:09 AM, Kris Zyp wrote: > > Thanks for the heads up, Mark, I will be watching the activity > there, that would be great if the problem can be dealt with in that > group. > However, the issues of responses being indefinitely queued in > pipelining situations and unbounded memory growth on continuous > streaming responses are still present, and I don't think there is > anything the HTTP WG can do about that. I think a hint that a request is expected to be long-term persistent would be useful in any case, to let the user agent know that it shouldn't pipeline other requests on the same connection. Perhaps this can be a simple boolean, if http itself relaxes connection limits and so removes the need for more complex functionality along these lines. - Maciej > > Thanks, > Kris > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org> > To: "Kris Zyp" <kzyp@sitepen.com> > Cc: <public-webapi@w3.org> > Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 6:16 AM > Subject: Re: Extra Connection Support Proposal > > >> FYI, you might be interested in this recent discussion in the HTTP >> WG, >> which could make this proposal unnecessary; >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2008JanMar/0423.html >> >> Mark. >> > >Received on Thursday, 6 March 2008 19:49:51 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:25 UTC