[quicwg/base-drafts] Barry Leiba's HTTP/3 Discuss 1 (#4771)

[Lucas Pardue <[e-mail]>]

@barryleiba said

> In Section 4.1.1 I’m confused by the combination of the following two
> paragraphs, and would like to discuss what I’m missing:
>
> >    Like HTTP/2, HTTP/3 does not use the Connection header field to
> >    indicate connection-specific fields; in this protocol, connection-
> >    specific metadata is conveyed by other means.  An endpoint MUST NOT
> >    generate an HTTP/3 field section containing connection-specific
> >    fields; any message containing connection-specific fields MUST be
> >    treated as malformed (Section 4.1.3).
> >
> > ...
> >
> >    This means that an intermediary transforming an HTTP/1.x message to
> >    HTTP/3 will need to remove any fields nominated by the Connection
> >    field, along with the Connection field itself.  Such intermediaries
> >    SHOULD also remove other connection-specific fields, such as Keep-
> >    Alive, Proxy-Connection, Transfer-Encoding, and Upgrade, even if they
> >    are not nominated by the Connection field.
>
> Given the MUST in the first, how can the second only be SHOULD?  Wouldn’t such
> an intermediary, acting as the HTTP/3 client, be producing a malformed message
> if it did not “remove other connection-specific fields”?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4771