- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:31:29 -0700
- To: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
- Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
James wrote: >> +1 ... for completeness, the definition of the RST_STREAM and GOAWAY >> frames can say that the FINAL flag is to be ignored in all cases >> because the frames themselves are terminal in nature. Agreed, clarification == good. On 25 April 2013 12:21, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote: > GOAWAY and RST_STREAM have different semantics -- but I would note that > RST_STREAM is different than FINAL because it puts the stream in a closed > state and not half-closed and thus behaves differently when the initiator of > the stream sends it (RST_STREAM w/ CANCEL for example) Absolutely. The initiator can abandon a stream, and RST_STREAM signals three things: I wont send any more, what I sent isn't complete, and don't send me any more. FINAL covers only the first part of that. But I don't see how those differences are relevant to this case. Can you expand?
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2013 19:32:00 UTC