Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397)

• From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
• Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 08:44:09 -0700
• To: Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com>
• Cc: Daniel Sommermann <dcsommer@fb.com>, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>, "K.Morgan@iaea.org" <K.Morgan@iaea.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "C.Brunhuber@iaea.org" <C.Brunhuber@iaea.org>
• Message-ID: <CABkgnnX+9PF_4W0PdgdWACBcxi2szkoH_aXp0skoY+7_yCfZJg@mail.gmail.com>

On 19 June 2014 00:51, Yutaka Hirano <yhirano@google.com> wrote:
> I don't want to require all intermediaries to understand WS over HTTP/2.

If this is the requirement, then you'll need to retain END_SEGMENT.

I'm not convinced that this is right though.  I'd rather have an
explicit acknowledgement that my protocol is understood by the
entities that are participating in it.

Imagine what would happen if an intermediary decided to cache the
response to your websocket request...

Received on Thursday, 19 June 2014 15:44:37 UTC