- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 14:14:39 +0200
- To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
- CC: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Jamie Lokier wrote: > Daniel Stenberg wrote: >> Sorry, but can you clarify how you would read that paragraph to get that >> meaning out of it? (I'm not suggesting you think this, I just don't see how >> it can be intrepreted that way.) >> >> Here's that last paragraph of RFC2817 5.2 with my comments: >> >> Like any other pipelined HTTP/1.1 request, data to be tunneled may be >> sent immediately after the blank line. >> >> This seems to be like it's saying that everything after the blank line is >> tunneled. And it also mentions pipelining (in a funny way if you ask me), >> which only works for requests with no request-bodies. > > Pipelining works (in principle) for requests with request bodies too. > > They just need to be idempotent requests, because you might not know > if the request succeeded when the connection is dropped. Which is > probably why pipelining is never used with anything other than HEAD > and GET in practice. I think Subversion uses it with REPORT and PROPFIND as well. > ... BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 12:15:29 UTC