- From: Adrian Cole <adrian.f.cole@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:01:01 -0700
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I had a look at a websocket over http/2 draft yesterday. I noticed it saying we should return an http 501 upon some setting thing not working out. https://github.com/yutakahirano/ws-over-http2/blob/master/draft-hirano-websocket-over-http2.txt#L235 This made me scratch my head, as I implement http/2 framing, settings, etc than the layer than handles http semantics (eg what a 501 means). IOTW, I would have expected an extension to enumerate an error I'd send on goaway, not an http response code. As an implementor, I would handle code very differently if something in SETTINGS means I should return a specific HEADERS frame back. Looking at the spec, it doesn't specify on what types of actions we might take on a SETTING being unsupported. Should we be? https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-14#section-5.5 Apologies, if I missed a thread that discussed this. -A
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2014 06:01:28 UTC