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

Re: Getting to Consensus on 1xx Status Codes (#535)

From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:19:33 +1000
Message-ID: <CAH_y2NG3rpDkJhdxZY4N=71L545_SYEo+Ptjijj1z4YVdy_3ug@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 21 July 2014 04:59, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> Roy’s point below hasn’t been discussed in the context of HTTP/2 before
> IIRC; he’s right in that the nature of expect/continue in HTTP/1 is not
> just hop-by-hop.
> Given that, it sounds like we need to address this issue (e.g., using
> Julian’s patch), and also adjust our existing text about 100-continue (and
> perhaps even about 101).

The commit that Martin has just made to close #535 says:
HTTP/2 removes support for the two 1xx series status codes defined in <xref
target="RFC7231" x:fmt="," x:rel="#status.1xx"/>): 100 (Continue), and 101
(Switching Protocols)

Is this a work in progress?    I took the meaning of Marks email was that
h2 would continue to support 100 and even maybe 101?


Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2014 01:20:02 UTC

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