W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2015

RE: GOAWAY clarification

From: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 18:54:54 +0000
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BL2PR03MB1324293E5BCA0078B0D1E1A870D0@BL2PR03MB132.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
One inconsistency in the revised text:  You still say at line 2444 that initiating new requests "is inadvisable."  It's not just inadvisable, it's MUST NOT at line 2353.

I'll also note that the seamless hand-off is a perfect reason for the DRAINING frame extension that was also floated during that discussion -- DRAINING could be defined as a hint that the client should spin up a secondary connection because a GOAWAY is coming soon.  No harm if the client doesn't understand or obey it -- the loss is strictly its own.

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Thomson [mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 7:36 AM
To: Mike Bishop
Cc: HTTP Working Group
Subject: Re: GOAWAY clarification

On 22 March 2015 at 20:27, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22 March 2015 at 17:17, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> On the other hand, I'm still inclined to see MUST NOT create new streams as the intent of GOAWAY.

I've updated the PR.  I think that this is *purely* clarification now.
Please confirm that this is the case.

https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/733/files

Received on Monday, 23 March 2015 18:55:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:43 UTC