- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 00:26:16 +1300
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 26/11/2012 11:23 p.m., Roberto Peon wrote: > I was understanding that Willy was suggesting that we potentially add > a recommendation (or stronger) about what an intermediary should do > when it has a response which is framed by connection close. > Specifically, if a response is framed by connection close, then, treat > the response as if it was uncacheable and attempt to convey to the > client that the originator of the response framed with connection close. > That indication could be accomplished by also framing with connection: > close, or it could take the form (if we extend the spec) of a new > header of some kind. A header is kind of a non-starter unless it is a trailer or chunk indicator of some kind. Abortions can happen on responses too large to buffer - very likely to in fact. Amos
Received on Monday, 26 November 2012 11:26:54 UTC