W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: END_SEGMENT and headers

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:00:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNc9MW3mCdzcquPbiW_QE2qi+yGMSsLohRdAht0UuKaoqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Seems like a reasonable reduction/improvement to me.
-=R


On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 9:54 PM, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote:

> The END_SEGMENT flag is defined for HEADERS frames, but it seems to be
> meaningless. A literal reading of the draft seems to say that such a frame
> cannot be coalesced with subsequent CONTINUATION frames, but those frames
> do not also have the same (useless) segmentation capability.
>
> Why not let END_SEGMENT and END_HEADERS be the same bit? Then headers be
> treated as the first segment of any stream, by some simplistic
> intermediaries. It also reclaims a flag bit, as they are running into short
> supply.
>
> Also, is END_SEGMENT required when END_STREAM is set? It seems it should
> be, for the sake of protocol regularity.
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2014 05:01:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:29 UTC