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

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

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 07:35:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWhRThVS5WmMFi3-cZNJbSq-icmeNHQUxRo_1ZXeXKJ8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 22 July 2014 07:03, Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 100-continue is a sufficient, but not necessary, precondition for the
> request body. The mechanism allows opportunistic elision of the
> request body, that's all.
> If this is considered too weak, and H2 wants to strengthen the
> semantics so that the client MUST wait for server approval before
> sending the body, I'm all for it. But it is not the semantics of
> 100-continue in H1.

I don't think that we need to change any semantics.  That invites
re-opening the 723x discussions, discussions that I know were lengthy.
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2014 14:36:06 UTC

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