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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

CONNECT #95

Closed
MikeBishop opened this issue Dec 22, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

CONNECT #95

MikeBishop opened this issue Dec 22, 2016 · 3 comments
Labels
-http design An issue that affects the design of the protocol; resolution requires consensus. has-consensus An issue that the Chairs have determined has consensus, by canvassing the mailing list.

Comments

@MikeBishop
Copy link
Contributor

Need discussion of how CONNECT works. Initial thought:

  • Client does not close data stream after sending request
  • If server responds (on the message control stream) with success, the data stream is being relayed into a TCP connection by the server.

Is there a QUIC-CONNECT? (Probably not, and almost certainly not in this document.)
MikeBishop added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 23, 2016
@MikeBishop
Describing CONNECT method for #95
d9bb52f
MikeBishop added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 23, 2016
@MikeBishop
Describing CONNECT method for #95
57eac9c
MikeBishop added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 23, 2016
@MikeBishop
Describing CONNECT method for #95
43830f3
@MikeBishop MikeBishop mentioned this issue Dec 23, 2016
Merged
@MikeBishop MikeBishop added the proposal-ready An issue which has a proposal that is believed to be ready for a consensus call. label Jan 12, 2017
@mnot mnot added the design An issue that affects the design of the protocol; resolution requires consensus. label Jan 19, 2017
@mnot mnot changed the title CONNECT in HTTP/QUIC CONNECT Jan 20, 2017
@mnot mnot removed the proposal-ready An issue which has a proposal that is believed to be ready for a consensus call. label Jan 25, 2017
@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Jan 25, 2017

Discussed in Tokyo; some doubt about the usefulness, but Chrome + Google Data Saver expresses interest in using it. If semantics are different than normal HTTP CONNECT, it's not CONNECT...

Leaving open for later discussion.

@mnot mnot mentioned this issue Jan 25, 2017
Closed
@MikeBishop
Copy link
Contributor Author

MikeBishop commented Mar 9, 2017 •
edited
Loading

@mnot - given the new semantics of issue closure, does this still need to be open? We have a proposal in the draft that preserves the semantics of HTTP CONNECT, and we have a use case.

@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Mar 9, 2017

If you think it's ready to determine consensus, close it.

@mnot mnot added the has-consensus An issue that the Chairs have determined has consensus, by canvassing the mailing list. label Apr 19, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
-http design An issue that affects the design of the protocol; resolution requires consensus. has-consensus An issue that the Chairs have determined has consensus, by canvassing the mailing list.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@mnot @MikeBishop