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

Re: PUSH_PROMISE at invalid times

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 09:47:46 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVKbio0nb2ZLrBhByLEYj-Wyrd8FL+EUBO0VY2LPOi6HQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <tatsuhiro.t@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 17 August 2013 06:06, Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa <tatsuhiro.t@gmail.com> wrote:
> The alternative approach is always process PUSH_PROMISE
> and its header block, thus changes stream state and compression
> state. After that if the receiver thinks that it should be rejected,
> then issue RST_STREAM to the promised stream ID.

We've made it a general policy that we'll be really harsh on badly
behaving implementations.  Being tolerant of rubbish just hides
implementation issues.  We've all seen how much damage has done to
HTTP/1.1.

In this case, the only thing that is missing - at least in the cited
text - is another mention that it is possible that you can receive a
PUSH_PROMISE after sending RST_STREAM.  That's already in the stream
states section, but there's no mention in the PUSH_PROMISE section
that was added.
Received on Monday, 19 August 2013 16:48:13 UTC

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