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

Re: HTTP/2 response completed before its request

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 20:10:54 +0000
To: William Chan (ι™ˆζ™Ίζ˜Œ) <willchan@chromium.org>
cc: Johnny Graettinger <jgraettinger@chromium.org>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>, Jesse Wilson <jesse@swank.ca>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <16624.1404245454@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <CAA4WUYiH+oi0O0KKJA2oN8CEYJBkhw2yP=KgEvc29YDkRaL-4g@mail.gmail.com>, =?UTF-8?B?V2lsbGlhbSBDaGF
uICjpmYjmmbrmmIwp?= writes:

>I'm with Johnny here. A HTTP/2 stream roughly mirrors a TCP connection.
>I think conflating HTTP message semantics with the transport is a mistake.
>If the server really wants the other end to go away, why doesn't it just
>kill the connection with a RST_STREAM?

Because it wants the client to accept the 3xx, 4xx or 5xx response as
valid rather than discard it ?

>Moreover, the suggestion that the client should terminate sending the
>request with an END_STREAM flag sounds wrong. Isn't that actually modifying
>the HTTP request? I would think that you'd want the client to end the
>request with a RST_STREAM.

Again:  The server send a reply, the client accepted it, RST'ing the
stream seems wrong to me in that case.

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2014 20:11:21 UTC

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