- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 21:49:47 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: "David W. Morris" <dwm@xpasc.com>
- Cc: mogul@pa.dec.com, koen@win.tue.nl, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
David W. Morris: > [...] > >I have just reviewed RFC 2068 and find no indication that 100 (Continue) >is a hop-hop mechanism. Maybe we mean something different when we say hop-by-hop. What I meant is that the message transmission requirements and binary exponentiual backoff happen between *client* and *server* (these are the words the spec uses everywhere), not between *user agent* and *origin server*. In a chain of clients relaying a request, it would be up to each individual client to decide whether to wait for a 100. [....] >I would appreciate a reference to the working which establishes 100 >(Continue) as hop-hop. It is the use of the words `client' and `server', rather than `user agent' and `origin server' in the corresponsing sections like 8.2 and 10.1.1. > Dave Morris Koen.
Received on Friday, 4 July 1997 12:53:40 UTC