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

Re: END_SEGMENT and headers

From: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 07:12:53 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+pLO_hYfm0ReF+Y0fNuKEJBJnLwTV0tLs7LT4Y3UsAMhUfO5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
Cc: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>wrote:

> On 17 April 2014 09:46, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote:
>> The draft states both that frames can not be coalesced across a segment
>> boundary, but also that segment boundaries must be preserved.
>> You are correct that for a HEADERS frame w/ the END_SEGMENT flag set,
>> there is no way a server could coalesce frames because the next frames must
>> be CONTINUATION frames until the END_HEADERS flag is received, so in this
>> case, END_SEGMENT and END_HEADERS are equivalent.
> I've just come up against this issue in my implementation. Is it a
> protocol error to receive a HEADERS with END_SEGMENT set, but END_HEADERS
> cleared?
Treat it similarly to END_STREAM. That is the END_SEGMENT flag would be set
on the HEADERS frame and not on any CONTINUATION frames that follow it.
Received on Monday, 21 April 2014 14:13:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:30 UTC