- From: Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 05:39:58 +0000
- To: "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
------ Original Message ------ From: "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com> To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com> Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Sent: 20/03/2012 6:34:44 p.m. Subject: Re: Re[2]: Bad browser behaviour? >I suspect these things would just annoy users with unreliable network >connections. Wouldn't you be frustrated if a web page you were >looking at suddenly went blank just because your WiFi cut out? > do you receive a TCP RST from the peer when your Wifi cuts out? Adrien > > >Adam > > >On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote: > >> >> what about pop a warning, or clear the page? >> >> >>------ Original Message ------ >>From: "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com> >>To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com> >>Cc: "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> >>Sent: 20/03/2012 6:02:34 p.m. >>Subject: Re: Bad browser behaviour? >> >>> >>> >>>It's probably impossible for browsers to do anything else given that >>>browsers incrementally render chunk-transfered content. For example, >>>if the network were to hang at that point (rather than drop), they'd >>>do the same thing. >>> >>>Adam >>> >>> >>>On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Hi all >>>> >>>>we're seeing some (IMO) undesirable behaviour for all tested current >>>>browsers (we tested FF, Chrome, IE and Opera). >>>> >>>>It relates to abortive closes on chunked transfers. In this case, I'm >>>>talking about a server close prior to the final 0 chunk. >>>> >>>>All the browsers we tested ignore this and display the content with no >>>>warning whatsoever. >>>> >>>>For our proxy to treat it as an abortive close is therefore a problem in >>>>our >>>>customers' eyes. >>>> >>>>So what's the deal? Should we allow this behaviour in the spec? Or >>>>should >>>>browser vendors be encouraged to break the page / download? >>>> >>>>Isn't it a potential security issue? >>>> >>>>Adrien >>>> >>>> >
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2012 05:40:38 UTC