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

Re: [#228] PUSH_PROMISE with CONTINUATION can end a stream

From: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 15:58:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+pLO_jzYVitaCm-9AHQ3xe2=9wxaFL5+qP_qD5oQhSXrmKU3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
PUSH_PROMISE is hop-by-hop -- if you end the stream with a push promise
flag you have to tell intermediates to forward the flag on some other
frame, and that may or may not break the semantics of the layered
application.


On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:54 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> I see no reason at all why PUSH_PROMISE can't have END_STREAM.
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Martin Thomson
> <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> > https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/228
> >
> > PUSH_PROMISE does not have an END_STREAM flag.
> >
> > However, a sender might emit a PUSH_PROMISE followed by a CONTINUATION
> > with the END_STREAM set. As specified, this ends the stream.
> >
> > I think that we need to either prohibit this, or we add END_STREAM to
> > PUSH_PROMISE.  I don't care which.  Bike shed... go!
> >
>
>
Received on Monday, 12 August 2013 22:58:45 UTC

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