- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 20:21:34 +0000
- To: Johnny Graettinger <jgraettinger@chromium.org>
- cc: William Chan (ιζΊζ) <willchan@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>
In message <CAEn92Tq5rXvaPc1jLU-oUWfZPTnsbed2XXmgBRR6jasLG+jv5g@mail.gmail.com>, Johnny Graettinger writes : >> Because it wants the client to accept the 3xx, 4xx or 5xx response as >> valid rather than discard it ? > >Ah. The client received a full and complete response from the server. In >the face of a RST_STREAM / NO_ERROR, there's no reason for it to discard it. I think that's just making semantics more complicated than they need to be. Let END_STREAM mark orderly mutually understood closes, and keep RST for when things actually go wrong in some bad way. -- 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 20:21:57 UTC