IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Permissible states for extension frames #591

Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> Tue, 12 August 2014 04:55 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B5991A026E for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:55:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uMeiWWJCPHrn for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD06D1A0262 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:55:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XH44F-0001mB-2o for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:52:15 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:52:15 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XH44F-0001mB-2o@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gregw@intalio.com>) id 1XH43o-0001da-5h for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:51:48 +0000
Received: from mail-wg0-f50.google.com ([74.125.82.50]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gregw@intalio.com>) id 1XH43m-00049s-Nv for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:51:48 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id n12so9508681wgh.9 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=f4mWyTiH1qqYrirqeNoV92EYMpg0BPm4KW9SBda5ijc=; b=WpILl07itaZpfZXbctu5M0FbHLXpAfXLATOaf92Z0nupKmM7y6Zf5YY9Z+x5NOhLGp 3ET7cyPnT+bTwcG4qJQeX8qg2358u+74owLEvu6d9+Q5xSFtpiRkwBphp0eAq86+eD4x MtlMq73phBAZx9hvjiYaM0kuQs8a6Bq85YMxOFqKlCJgcczb6ZzphTRx32ZaNjROFIGC PcaO5UoICYN2LwCDZDGQKPMX1qw1NcfqilGAujnCMNMmTexgfs48QiUdLp359USIgLzQ iykVBOAxa6paBbgVWf0c4xKdFYtQvvpDWrmZ0H1kSRxvCIGM93L+jBYjprQghQ4f+CzA EdvA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmt6F5edcg17aXwuY4HRBPCnhvPCqgJukt5zQhh5Nsrxlq4GtKqLWwJItpY+KPNwzgmErqg
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.23.8 with SMTP id i8mr2386679wjf.104.1407819080042; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.169.98 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:51:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUZxaVnSOEf8D2HQGZRWc0K1UNs99FswdFYUz8Wg9cq=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnVgnJSmJW2B4nJ8Vb-Nwi3EF2pra7D_m8uqZfQ8H1a2eA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NGofk6bsLOr510MuSVuh9=EhTVBYROGBnAdeie-YQS-8Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUZxaVnSOEf8D2HQGZRWc0K1UNs99FswdFYUz8Wg9cq=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:51:19 +1000
Message-ID: <CAH_y2NGkitE9Ow+rhxL4a2U+hVJu=QN2C=Wy5ZrvWaLA3H9cXQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b87414e2ca53a0500676cdc"
Received-SPF: permerror client-ip=74.125.82.50; envelope-from=gregw@intalio.com; helo=mail-wg0-f50.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-3.080, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1XH43m-00049s-Nv 2ede7cd36dc98e427a53dc2e484408c6
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Permissible states for extension frames #591
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAH_y2NGkitE9Ow+rhxL4a2U+hVJu=QN2C=Wy5ZrvWaLA3H9cXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/26589
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>

On 12 August 2014 13:00, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Greg, this issue has nothing whatsoever to do with CONTINUATIONS, other
> than to note that extensions would not be permitted within a sequence of
> continuations.



Martin,

I don't know how it is not related to continuations?    The question was
are we OK with allowing extension frames to appear anywhere for any stream?

I'm not OK with that because of continuation frames, which I believe have
to be sent in a contiguous block.   We have to specify that extensions
frames are OK anywhere except between HEADERS and CONTINUATION and between
CONTINUATION frames.

I would also be OK with extensions frames anywhere, but only if
continuations allowed interleaving.... the consensus was not to do that, so
we can't allows extension frames anywhere and have to have a more complex
specification for them.

I'm sorry if it looks like I'm trying to fight the already lost
continuation battle.   I'm not, I'm just making sure that we keep the
specification consistent with the complexities of the continuation
mechanism.


regards





-- 
Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status