W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: HTTP 2.0 "Upgrade" flow

From: Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 23:10:53 +0000
To: "Gabriel Montenegro" <Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com>, "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>, "Ilari Liusvaara" <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>, "Ilya Grigorik" <ilya@igvita.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <em72808be3-bf20-45c2-a6c7-b0eece27dc8f@bombed>

------ Original Message ------
From: "Gabriel Montenegro" <Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com>
>>  >I think that you either send the session header immediately after 
>>  >first request (the Upgrade) and risk having it swalled,
>>  that could do nasty things if the server is only 1.1
>>  >or you send it
>>  >immediately before the next (HTTP/2.0) request. In either case, you
>>  >don't incur an RTT delay.
>>  next request may not exist.
>So the client is done then. Why is it an issue? What would be gained by 
>the client sending its session header after it was done effectively 
>using the session?

proxy doesn't know if the client is done or not.
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2013 23:11:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:10 UTC