Re: HTTP/2 response completed before its request from Jeff Pinner on 2014-07-01 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2014)

From: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:47:47 -0700
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>, Jesse Wilson <jesse@swank.ca>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CA+pLO_jM-yTZsqqZYb3qxUGge8gLwU37zf5KZydKtSenjXbm1g@mail.gmail.com>

RST_STREAM NO_ERROR

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Martin Thomson
<martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 July 2014 10:55, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org> wrote:
>> This same theoretical problem happens for HTTP/1.X over TCP. If the peers
>> don't call read() to pull the TCP data into user space, the kernel's TCP
>> stack will eventually shrink the receive window to 0. Of course, the TCP
>> receive windows will generally be larger than HTTP/2's initial windows
>> (64K).
>
> The stall is half of the problem, but do you cancel the send as well?
> If the server has provided a response and closed the stream, there is
> no point in continuing to send them data.  Especially if they forget
> to send window updates.
>
> RST_STREAM seems appropriate, but what do you think is the right code?
>

Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2014 18:48:14 UTC