- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:32:16 +1000
- To: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 24/04/2013, at 12:41 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote: >>> >>> I think we can give better advice than that. If a server responds with a final status code instead of 100 (Continue) >>> >>> 1. The response must be the last response on the connection. The response should contain "Connection: close" header. After the response is written, the server must initiate a lingering close of the connection (p1#6.6). >> That seems too restrictive; as long as the server reads the rest of the request properly (discarding it), it should be able to recover and reuse the connection. > > The problem comes with intermediaries. How are they to know the bytes following were the original advertised payload or not? the status from server has no guarantee of arriving after the client payload starts arriving. > The only way to guarantee safety on the connection is to close it or always send payload. True. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2013 03:32:41 UTC