- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 09:08:08 +0200
- To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 06:45:15PM +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> The key word in there is probably "browser", the assumption that each
> client is singular ("browser") and that each connection is singular
> ("user") is very widespread.
>
> That is no reason for any compliant server to disconnect. Let the broken
> servers do it, and let the correct servers gain the benefits of being
> correct.
+1 on this.
> Referring to this part specifically: "the server should close the
> connection (after draining possibly pending data), just as it would do
> on a redirect to another domain"
>
>
> >From what I remember of my last reading of draft-19, it was clearly stated
> >that if a transfer-encoding other than chunked is present, then chunked
> >MUST
> >be present last so the transfer is always chunk-encoded, precisely for this
> >issue. You can send safely reject messages which contain Transfer-Encoding
> >without "chunked" as the last one (you'd better recheck the spec than take
> >my word for it though).
>
> There is no mandate that chunked is *always* to be used with them
> though. Only that when combined the best is last.
Yes, I just found it :
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-20#section-3.3.1
If any transfer-coding is applied to a
request payload body, the final transfer-coding applied MUST be
"chunked". If any transfer-coding is applied to a response payload
body, then either the final transfer-coding applied MUST be "chunked"
or the message MUST be terminated by closing the connection.
> We have had to take that assumption on our own guess at good-practice in
> Squid and decoded to always chunk 1.1 when content-length is missing.
> Regardless of other encodings.
I think this was recent additions from http-bis (which is a very important one).
Regards,
Willy
Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 07:08:40 UTC