- From: Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 19:50:23 +0900
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Thanks Martin, You're right. HEADER+END_STREAM goes like two step transitions and PUSH_PRMISE can be sent in hald closed(remote). The table was fixed and updated. The transition flow of PUSH_PROMISE confused me much. I hope no more fix is needed. (2013/07/19 1:37), Martin Thomson wrote: > On 18 July 2013 01:32, Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@iij.ad.jp> wrote: >>> Also, I think that anytime DATA can be successfully received, >>> WINDOW_UPDATE can be sent (half closed (local) seems to violate >>> that). >> >> >> PRIORITY can also be received in reserved(local/remote) accrding to the >> above model. > > No this is also incorrect in the table. If you can receive DATA, then > the protocol requires that you be able to send WINDOW_UPDATE. > > Another bug I noticed is that it should be possible to send > PUSH_PROMISE in half closed (remote) and to receive it in half closed > (local). >
Received on Friday, 19 July 2013 10:50:56 UTC