Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SEMANTICS describes CONNECT in HTTP/1.1 terms #737

Closed
MikeBishop opened this issue Feb 4, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #775
Closed

SEMANTICS describes CONNECT in HTTP/1.1 terms #737

MikeBishop opened this issue Feb 4, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #775

Comments

@MikeBishop
Copy link
Contributor

I think the goal was for SEMANTICS to stay out of message framing and leave that to the individual mappings. It currently says this about CONNECT:

Any 2xx (Successful) response indicates that the sender (and all inbound proxies) will switch to tunnel mode immediately after the blank line that concludes the successful response's header section; data received after that blank line is from the server identified by the request target.

Perhaps this should simply talk about data received after the header section, and leave the boundaries of that version-specific?

@mnot mnot added the semantics label Feb 5, 2021
@royfielding
Copy link
Member

Yes, we just missed a spot. Willy noticed this one as well. It should be something like

Any 2xx (Successful) response indicates that the sender (and all inbound proxies) will switch to tunnel mode immediately after the response's header section; data received after the header section is from the server identified by the request target.

@wtarreau
Copy link

wtarreau commented Feb 7, 2021

Yes, I wanted to suggest "header section" as well as it's the term used in messaging. There is a second occurrence of this one in "15.2.2 - 101 Switching Protocols" : "will be switched to immediately after the empty line that terminates the 101 response".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants