Re: WGLC p1: Tear-down

["Adrien W. de Croy" <[e-mail]>]

------ Original Message ------
From: "Mark Nottingham" <[e-mail]>
>
>On 30/04/2013, at 12:38 PM, Adrien W. de Croy <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>>  ------ Original Message ------
>>  From: "Zhong Yu" <[e-mail]>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Ben Niven-Jenkins 
>>><[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>  Section 6.6 of p1 states:
>>>
>>>  OLD:
>>>     the client SHOULD assume that they will not be processed by the 
>>>server.
>>>  NEW:
>>>     the client SHOULD NOT assume that they will be processed by the 
>>>server.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Agreed; an origin server may also process pipelined requests 
>>>concurrently, so request#2 may have been processed when response#1 
>>>causes Connection:close.
>>
>>  Given that it's really hard for a client to predict the future, as to 
>>whether a pipelined request will be processed or not, or whether a 
>>previous resource will return Connection: close or not, and even to 
>>tell whether a request will be truly without side-effects, doesn't 
>>this mean it's just basically dangerous to pipeline full stop?
>>
>>  Do we need a way for a server to communicate which requests may be 
>>made with impunity multiple times, and which should only be made once? 
>>e.g. safe to retry or not. then only pipeline requests that are safe 
>>to retry according to the server (rather than according to some 
>>assumption or heuristic at the client, as such things are inevitably 
>>wrong on occasion).
>
>That's built into the method of the request...
that's what I meant by assume.

UA authors might assume GET is idempotent.  It doesn't stop web 
developers from writing sites that have significant side-effects on GET. 
  Getting these people to indicate safety of retrying is another problem. 
  I guess this is one reason why pipelining isn't that widespread yet.  
Lots of problems with it.

Regards

Adrien

>
>>  A user agent should not pipeline requests after a non-idempotent 
>>method until the final response status code for that method has been 
>>received, unless the user agent has a means to detect and recover from 
>>partial failure conditions involving the pipelined sequence.
>
>--
>Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>