Re: GOAWAY clarification

Thanks Mike,

On 23 March 2015 at 11:54, Mike Bishop <> wrote:
> 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.

That sounds like a great plan to me.  I look forward to someone
proposing this extension some day.

Received on Monday, 23 March 2015 19:56:41 UTC