- From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:13:53 +1200
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 23/07/2014 2:08 a.m., Mark Nottingham wrote: > 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 +1. > > - ignore a HEADERS that’s 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