Re: MUST a client wait for 100 when doing PUT or POST?

• From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
• Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:30:48 -0700
• To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
• Message-Id: <9706111130.aa26419@paris.ics.uci.edu>

John Franks writes:
>We should be very clear on the consequences of server requirements
>in RFC2068.  The server must respond to *every* PUT and POST with
>a "100 CONTINUE" or an error status.  It is my belief that 99% of
>these transactions will be useless and will be ignored by the recipient.

They are not transactions.  They are messages that result in 20 bytes
or so being sent to the client before the request is fully processed.

David W. Morris wrote:
> I think that combined with making the 100 CONTINUE an explicitly requested
> optional response would provide the step wise operation which would
> provide the efficiency when needed by assuring the client the ability to
> expect the 100 CONTINUE but have no requirement for any server to always
> response with 100 CONTINUE. I think a win-win.

I have no problem with this solution, aside from the fact that it is a
year late (two years from my perspective) and needs to be fleshed-out.

....Roy

Received on Wednesday, 11 June 1997 12:10:34 UTC