- From: Daniel Sommermann <dcsommer@fb.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 10:19:06 -0700
- To: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 06/30/2014 09:54 AM, David Krauss wrote: > “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. > David, we had a discussion on this thread about two weeks ago about the layering violations and constraints on intermediaries that are introduced by END_SEGMENT and whether END_SEGMENT is needed for the core spec. Also, I brought up the fact that END_SEGMENT's requirements on intermediary behavior is not compatible with HTTP/1.1 interfaces. There is no concept of segments in HTTP/1.1, so there is no way to transfer those semantics through an HTTP/1.1 interface. I've updated the linked issue in the subject line.
Received on Monday, 30 June 2014 17:19:30 UTC