RE: GOAWAY clarification

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 [] 
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 <> wrote:
> On 22 March 2015 at 17:17, Mike Bishop <> 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.

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