#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:
- 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 10 years ago by fielding@…
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by fielding@…
- Resolution set to incorporated
- Status changed from new to closed
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
From [2032]:
(editorial) improvements to persistent connections section; addresses #396