- From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
- Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 21:52:27 +0300
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>, Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 10:35:45AM -0700, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 6 September 2013 04:23, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote: > > > So like I said 100 and 101 can occur in any order. There is no reason for > > the order of them to have any effect on the transaction as a whole. 101 > > has no effect on the *request* bytes and 100 has no effect on the > > *response* bytes. Why are people seeing any problem here at all? > > I don't think that a server upgrading to HTTP/2.0 should be sending > 100 responses that control the sending of the HTTP/1.1 request. I > just can't imagine how that would be healthy. So if server sends 101 and then 100, one direction of connection is HTTP/1.1 and the other is HTTP/2.0 until the request is completed? Does the HTTP/2.0 flow control apply? :-> -Ilari
Received on Friday, 6 September 2013 18:53:05 UTC