Opened 7 years ago

Closed 7 years ago

Last modified 7 years ago

#396 closed editorial (incorporated)

editorial improvements to persistent connections section

Reported by: julian.reschke@… Owned by: draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging@…
Priority: normal Milestone: 22
Component: p1-messaging Severity: In WG Last Call
Keywords: Cc:

Description

6.2. Persistent Connections

I'd mentioned this before on the list, but all the intro text here except for the final "HTTP implementations SHOULD implement persistent connections" is really only of historical interest and could just go away. The "SHOULD implement" requirement could be moved into "6.2.2 Reuse", and then each of the subsections of 6.2 could be promoted up to become a direct child of section 6. So you'd get:

  1. Connection Management 6.1. Connection 6.2. Establishment 6.3. Reuse 6.3.1. Pipelining 6.3.2. Retrying Requests 6.4. Concurrency 6.5. Failures and Time-outs 6.6. Tear-down 6.7. Upgrade

6.2.2. Reuse

A server MAY assume that an HTTP/1.1 client intends to maintain a persistent connection until a close connection option is received in a request.

SHOULD?

Change History (3)

comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by fielding@…

From [2032]:

(editorial) improvements to persistent connections section; addresses #396

comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by fielding@…

  • Resolution set to incorporated
  • Status changed from new to closed

comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by fielding@…

From [2033]:

Move new user agent requirement on rendering incomplete responses to a suggestion in security considerations. Addresses #408 and #415

Consolidate more stuff on persistent connection reuse. Addresses #396

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.