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

RE: hpack table size 0

From: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 14:29:58 +0000
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "K.Morgan@iaea.org" <K.Morgan@iaea.org>
CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <782ac838428e4c54b11f5655b049c9e4@BL2PR03MB132.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
I was thinking of REFUSED_STREAM, not CANCEL -- sorry.  REFUSED_STREAM does explicitly say that the request can be retried.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@mnot.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2014 12:15 AM
To: K.Morgan@iaea.org
Cc: Mike Bishop; ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: hpack table size 0

On 1 Jul 2014, at 1:46 am, K.Morgan@iaea.org wrote:

> Won't "RST_STREAM CANCEL" lead to indeterminate behaviour from the client?  How does the client know to retry the stream?  The spec never mentions that a client should retry.

This spec doesn't, but HTTP does...

That said, the layering here needs some cleaning up. We could either re-specify this in HTTP/2, or make it clear when we re-factor 7230 to go to full Standard.

The latter is on the agenda for Toronto...


Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2014 14:30:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:08 UTC