Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete
Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> Sat, 29 June 2013 05:42 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EE4F21F9E80 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:42:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EZsldrHEaSdR for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9E0A21F9E8F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Usnv6-0003or-G7 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 05:42:00 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 05:42:00 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Usnv6-0003or-G7@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1Usnus-0003lq-Ox for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 05:41:46 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.219.43]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <grmocg@gmail.com>) id 1Usnus-0000eF-1U for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 05:41:46 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id i7so3147640oag.16 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VrYGsV6ixhXIYv5Gys7QLzqgFt2CT0zVSuwPy3A1sgM=; b=x4qBSWBxax/icTSiX8MqaxvIa8Wa2w/qkMaoK88d5VNn/M683HAh9t1JHttga1KuHF 8eSBOC7H8dEYnJ00Ns3w8qryBpouTyZ4dmlGGiN8mbVeSobmJLbxZ88z7/6hI4fI6xWZ nx2oCc3eW/hdqny6Nnl9RIELdc8ohYHXBtZ4JItql40u0jTiFrl1+CHA7k42WiSuJucd ATOuOkfqOVjSwXIekxXvhrnxy0cDo1u/a0NrdDJWwR9WwLWKI3vTJx7Y82bwhFFO82i9 1bUpqfTlGnTVZIxkKiH8Wq7j2depMGvQrd+V4mliVgkdxXHceRAIW/H+GMS14ew9Xhzt 2dHg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.55.196 with SMTP id u4mr6398345oep.57.1372484480046; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.71.10 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABP7RbcAWkm9uqkQt2dsYYnHw40ax7mM7GEjLDE8uBn4pn-4Pg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABP7RbcAWkm9uqkQt2dsYYnHw40ax7mM7GEjLDE8uBn4pn-4Pg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:41:19 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNfG7=mS_b-7tPrM_zDXefwa9xno64VkX4ranCDp4tTJsg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e012292ace49d6004e044715c"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.43; envelope-from=grmocg@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f43.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.676, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Usnus-0000eF-1U d1c961ae213b41e95b85f59d2fedb8be
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the request is complete
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAP+FsNfG7=mS_b-7tPrM_zDXefwa9xno64VkX4ranCDp4tTJsg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18411
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
I could see adding a blurb which states that headers are not complete unless they're complete, but otherwise, this is HTTPbis as opposed to HTTP/2 material, I think? -=R On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:35 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/154 > > Suggested add to the HTML mapping... > > --- > The server MUST NOT begin sending the response header block > until it receives all of the request headers from the > client; however, the server MAY begin sending the response > immediately after receiving the request headers without waiting > for the complete request payload or trailers to be received. > --- > > Since we added HEADER continuations, there is a risk that a server > might begin its response to a request prematurely, without waiting for > the complete set of headers to be received. Doing so could cause quite > a few major issues including caching problems. > > While this is not something that we can strictly enforce as a MUST, it > is something that servers really ought to do. > >
- Issue #154: Sending a response before the request… James M Snell
- Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the req… Roberto Peon
- Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the req… James M Snell
- Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the req… Jeff Pinner
- Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the req… Martin Thomson
- Re: Issue #154: Sending a response before the req… Roberto Peon