- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:07:58 +1300
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 27/03/2013 9:41 a.m., Martin Thomson wrote: > On 26 March 2013 13:28, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Bottom line: what do I do differently in response to a refused stream >>> as opposed to a cancelled one? >> You (rather, a browser) can automatically send the request again in the case >> where a non-idempotent method such as POST was used. >> With cancel, the browser would have to ask the client to confirm before >> doing so. > Why would the client not retry? I would have modeled all of these as > being equivalent to an HTTP/1.1 connection drop (albeit with a nicer > recovery story). > > It might help to examine why a server would send a RST_STREAM w/ > CANCEL. Here's what I can think of: > - server is overloaded, wants to send Retry-After for requests but > not lose the connection > - resource disappeared or changed mid-response > - an upstream connection or request broke > > Anything else? Because I can't see why retry is a bad idea in any of > these cases, subject to the normal restrictions (idempotence, stream > availability, etc...). A CONNECT or Upgrade: request is requiring the TCP connection be converted from HTTP/1 to something else. New streams are not necessarily unwanted, but cannot use the connection now. Amos
Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 11:08:35 UTC