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

Re: #535: No 1xx Status Codes

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 11:29:25 +0200
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20140715092924.GB12333@1wt.eu>
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 09:18:49AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <CAH_y2NFTWTP4DMaxCNYs1JqOCM8V+iwS7KZOui7Vua+bNMvgbg@mail.gmail.com>, Greg Wilkins wri
> tes:
> >I'd like to see 100 semantic supported in h2, 
> But isn't it already supported via the per-stream windows ?
> It's true that the sender can fill the initial per stream window
> before the receiver has a chance to decide if it wants the body
> or not, but I've never seen the 100-Continue as a mechanism to
> avoid sending a few unwanted tens of kilobyts, but rather to avoid
> sending unwanted mega- and gigabytes ?

It's also used a lot by webservices and other clients relying on
connection pools to ensure that a connection is still alive before
sending a non-idempotent request over it. I don't see what benefit
it could provide in HTTP/2 however since we can abort an upload in

Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 09:29:55 UTC

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