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

Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397)

From: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 00:54:47 +0800
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <575C6C71-E344-42FF-A157-8E35C2222C0A@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Sommermann <dcsommer@fb.com>
“Tackle”? It’s an editorial issue, and reviewing GitHub it essentially boils down to specifying what sort of flush should occur.

I don’t think anyone’s talking about removing END_SEGMENT or WebSocket support. It’s essential to interactive applications, including the sort of things that WebSockets often does. This is something all proxies should handle going forward.


On 2014–07–01, at 12:43 AM, Daniel Sommermann <dcsommer@fb.com> wrote:

> What's the right order to tackle this issue? Can we remove END_SEGMENT and then patch the websockets proposal, or do we need to have a story for websockets first?
> 
> Daniel
> 
Received on Monday, 30 June 2014 16:55:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC