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

Re: #557: Intra-message HEADERS frames

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:13:53 +1200
Message-ID: <53CEFE41.5010404@treenet.co.nz>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 23/07/2014 2:08 a.m., Mark Nottingham wrote:
> I donít hear a strong direction on this issue from the WG, so Iím 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

+1.

> 
> - ignore a HEADERS thatís not expected

-1.

IIRC, the presented use case for this has been to maintain checksums on
HTTP/1.1 chunked payloads. That is far better done as a checksum field
on DATA if the proponents of that want to push for it (or make an
extension for payload integrity checking). chunked checksums being a
hop-by-hop feature anyway which does not traverse middleware at all well
these days.

Amos
Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2014 00:14:42 UTC

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