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

Re: PING frame behavior

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 11:08:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXW60ruFu9ht-VERr-C8GHvzS9qGiwFqxmY05unRAjJZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
Cc: Alek Storm <alek.storm@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 19 April 2014 19:50, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Where would they get forwarded? End-to-end would be nice, but without a stream ID you can usually only go one hop. The spec leaves a little ambiguity, which seems OK to me.

Exactly right.  There's no language on the point because it can't
possibly go anywhere.

> Come to think of it, was end-to-end, stream-wise PING considered and rejected for a particular reason? I guess it would tend to flood origin servers that are usually cached, so that’s a major vulnerability.

That's the nature of the protocol.  You can't make any assumptions
about connectedness of any given hop.  The best liveness test is an
HTTP request, preferably a safe one, set Cache-Control according to
your requirements.
Received on Monday, 21 April 2014 18:08:50 UTC

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