- From: Thomson, Martin <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 07:42:39 +0800
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>, Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
> Adrien writes: > I don't see what the difference is between a new proxy connection > returning a 504 (e.g. the proxy can't connect to the server) vs proxy > reporting 504 connection aborted on an old connection before the proxy > could send the request to the server. That's not the scenario that this mechanism seeks to avoid. The idea is that a new connection is less likely to time out during the (non-idempotent) request than one that has been sitting idle for a while. This is a hop-by-hop thing. Obviously, if the request was going to fail anyway (at any hop), there's no gain. > > To the extent that it ensures that the connection remains open, sure. > You still need to know when the 1xx is required. > > > > Sure, that could use the same heuristics at the server that a client > would use. We seek to do away with such heuristics. They are brittle and inefficient. > > Adrien > --Martin
Received on Wednesday, 9 June 2010 23:41:25 UTC