- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 21:34:00 -0700
- 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