- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 11:15:23 +0200
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
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