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

Re: trailers and pseudo-headers

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:02:55 +0000
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20154.1404288175@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <53B3B835.80807@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes:
>On 2014-07-02 09:35, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> In message <53B3AD3A.8020307@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes:
>>> The reason I ask is that people might start putting ":status" into a
>>> trailer and expect that to have an effect (it would be nice to have that
>>> feature, but it wouldn't map to 1.1...).
>> It would also be pretty pointless:  It would just shift the buffering
>> responsibility from the server to the client.
>What I meant is: an *additional* :status (such as in first claiming 
>everything is ok -- 200, then start streaming and failing, and then send 
>a 500 in the trailers).

And if that is a risk, the client can do only one thing:  Buffer the
response, until it is sure what the :status will be.

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 Wednesday, 2 July 2014 08:03:17 UTC

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