- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 10:31:55 +1000
- To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
- Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints@ietf.org, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2 August 2017 at 07:50, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote: > I don't understand this text: > " HTTP/2 ([RFC7540]) server push can be used as a solution to this > issue, but has its own limitations. The responses that can be pushed > using HTTP/2 are limited to those belonging to the same origin. > " > > Isn't this also a limitation of 103? Yes. The claim about h2 is also incorrect: The server MUST include a value in the ":authority" pseudo-header field for which the server is authoritative (see Section 10.1). A client MUST treat a PUSH_PROMISE for which the server is not authoritative as a stream error (Section 5.4.2) of type PROTOCOL_ERROR. -- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7540#section-8.2
Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2017 00:32:18 UTC