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

Re: 1xx (informational) responses affect on stream management

From: Simone Bordet <simone.bordet@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 23:30:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFWmRJ2OM3bt1Kyq5QFRvQPHcgN44Rsmk5gqN-GmeKbTMwC1Cw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthew Cox <macox@microsoft.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi,

On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Martin Thomson
<martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 August 2014 11:05, Matthew Cox <macox@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> Currently I’m able to do all of my stream state management/transitions
>> without having to do any interpretation of the payload.  With draft-14 I now
>> need to know what is in the payload, so that the stream can correctly
>> identify what subsequent frames are allowed.  In my mind this crosses a
>> layer boundary.
>
>
> Maybe you can instead consider this in two parts:
>
> a) a valid sequence of frames, for which the combination of "zero or
> more" and "one" turns into "one or more"
>
> b) a valid HTTP response, for which the value of ":status" becomes relevant

I don't understand this answer in the context of the original
question, can you please expand ?

-- 
Simone Bordet
http://bordet.blogspot.com
---
Finally, no matter how good the architecture and design are,
to deliver bug-free software with optimal performance and reliability,
the implementation technique must be flawless.   Victoria Livschitz
Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2014 21:30:57 UTC

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