IETF Logo Mail Archive

HTTP Request+Response issues

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Wed, 24 April 2013 17:00 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 E07A921F8D31 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.18
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.18 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.365, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_SUB_NEED_REPLY=0.784]
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 iv6YjwzEas15 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56D6E21F8B13 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UV32a-0007IX-Vt for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:59:33 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:59:32 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UV32a-0007IX-Vt@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UV32W-0007Hr-MD for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:59:28 +0000
Received: from mail-oa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.219.52]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jasnell@gmail.com>) id 1UV32S-0006mg-6j for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:59:28 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id n12so1894610oag.25 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:58:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=8sjRkmJ1udhkNLJsEdQhZFpvcYdSW9OCjp1DPDTN9io=; b=mFanXHAWtlwZUrKMSVLyX/pPGQTwP2qraK7Yq8EajmKn5OZ1daK4Je4hknX7ng/ZE+ NkXtlxn3lp7QJFmURpgEO0srNmkvM5Ev85zsxKIoBqz8LZQ5RVXFXIKlLKTHHh96iFmc hMlcRrUAo/HBfjXwuda73GTn+fGBJ+4fPfGYQ3z5cnsOKAFz8MaXY5yauBJR+Tu2qeS/ BHNDobUJup8plQIQfzeo+6dcfnKod1N0MLaxyD6ssFtqggvn0YkNn8ftI7bkObTQUGgS veFSSDZfRKN6F3Oc8/qHAA3brmTzD9/hlpFdt/LAK8dhMX3HRsL6bCUyGdyjGKfs8/OZ JpLQ==
X-Received: by 10.60.92.230 with SMTP id cp6mr18752444oeb.91.1366822738021; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:58:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.3.137 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:58:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbebepmG=zVnj+X1DGy-4d8p7U15+vTjyba5cOYLyedKog@mail.gmail.com>
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.219.52; envelope-from=jasnell@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f52.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.681, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UV32S-0006mg-6j 3db5ee1741b13d7c5739f893627859a9
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: HTTP Request+Response issues
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABP7RbebepmG=zVnj+X1DGy-4d8p7U15+vTjyba5cOYLyedKog@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17541
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>

Reading through the current draft, unless I missed it, it needs to be
clarified that HTTP request and responses MUST be sent within the same
stream unless we specifically want to allow responses to be sent in a
different stream than the request.

For instance:

Request:
  Stream-ID: 1
  :method: get

Response:  (server uses the same stream)
  Stream-ID: 1
  :status: 200

OR...

Request:
  Stream-ID: 1
  :method: get

Response: (server uses a different stream)
  Stream-ID: 2
  :status: 200

Currently, it appears that this is an unspoken assumption in the spec
text that needs to be called out explicitly. Or, if it's already
there, it needs to be made more visible.

- James

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email