- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:08:28 -0400
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I don’t hear a strong direction on this issue from the WG, so I’m inclined to let the editor take the lead here unless strong opinions emerge (keeping in mind the changes to allow a non-final status code, which means the wording needs to be a bit different here). The choices seem to be: - PROTOCOL_ERROR upon a HEADERS where not expected - ignore a HEADERS that’s not expected Cheers, On 21 Jul 2014, at 9:07 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 20 July 2014 12:43, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: >> Section 8.1 already says: >> >>> Header blocks after the first that do not terminate the stream are not part of an HTTP request or response. >> >> <http://http2.github.io/http2-spec/#HttpSequence> >> >> Do we need to say anything else here, or can we go ahead and close this issue? > > Here I'll point out my mess-up of this: > > A recent edit of Section 8.1 changed this to say: > >> A HEADERS frame (and associated CONTINUATION frames) can only appear at the start or end of a stream. An endpoint that receives a second HEADERS frame without the END_STREAM flag set MUST treat the corresponding request or response as malformed (Section 8.1.2.5). > > That's the alternative. It's easy to back this out, depending on the > outcome of this discussion. > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2014 14:08:54 UTC