In message <>
, Jeff Pinner writes:
>On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <> wrote:
>> In message <>, Mark Nottingham wri
>> tes:
>>>>      * CONTINUATIONS are in most respects a way to create a single
>>>>        frame from many. Logically, they are part of the preceding
>>>>        HEADERS/PUSH_PROMISE. Adding some flags from the preceding
>>>>        frame but not others is conceptually muddy.
>> The fundamental problem is that CONTINUATIONS started for
>> one reason (superframes) and got hi-jacked for something
>> else (pipelining) which gives them the horrid exceptional
>> behaviour in the current draft.
>> At the very least that means that the END_STREAM bit goes on the
>> last frame on the stream, be it a HEADERS, PUSH_PROMISE or a
>> pipelining CONTINUATION frame.
>Moving all of the flags to the last CONTINUATION frame requires even
>more error handling.

Are you suggesting that ?  I havn't seen anybody else do so ?

>Moving just one of the flags is yet another exceptional case that
>requires more logic.

I think it makes everything much easier if END_STREAM always sits
on the packet which closes the stream.

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 Monday, 21 July 2014 08:21:00 UTC