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

Re: HTTP/2 extensions and proxies

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 21:34:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnW8f9juWi7acHzmx0ry2dTX-czNSH95dybVsRbL4GCPUw@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 1 October 2013 21:16, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I'm saying is, you either pass the unknown end-to-end frames
> through or send an RST_STREAM... meaning, if you encounter an unknown
> frame on a stream and you don't intend to pass it through, you drop
> the entire stream, and not just that frame.

Maybe.  That seems like a pretty harsh way to discourage use of
extensions.  It does allow for the discovery of an extension-blocking
intermediary, but maybe there are better ways to expose that
information than RST_STREAM.  (You need a new RST_STREAM code for
this, certainly.)
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 04:34:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:18 UTC