Re: PROPOSAL: i99 Pipelining Problems

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> 
> On Apr 4, 2008, at 6:00 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> Hmm.
>>
>> Any volunteers for providing spec-ready text?
> 
> "Shit happens.  Deal with it."
> 
> Seriously, there is no reason to specify all the possible ways
> in which messages might get lost on an unreliable connection.
> The only thing I would change is to resurrect my original design
> for the Keep-Alive header, which indicates how many more requests
> are allowed on a given persistent connection.  The others are just

Are you referring to the stuff discussed in 
<http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/ange/archives/archives-95/http-wg-archive/index.html#1661>?

> single point, non-reproducible bugs.

Right.

One point of confusion that comes up from time to time is the issue of 
ordering -- can a client that sends pipelined requests rely on the 
results arriving in the same order.

My understanding of the spec is "yes, of course", but I recall people 
arguing otherwise.

BR, Julian

Received on Saturday, 5 April 2008 09:16:14 UTC