https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47087
--- Comment #3 from Steven Bush <[email protected]> 2009-08-31 10:04:55 PDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > Re: the recent comment, that makes sense to me. Unless we close the > connection, we should retain its state so we can interpret subsequent data as > not-a-request. But that still leaves ambiguity if the next data look like a > syntactically valid request. > > I guess closing the connection is the only safe thing to do here, unless > someone has a better idea. Thinking. I think this is right. The RFC spec gives these two options: "If [the server] responds with a final status code, it MAY close the transport connection or it MAY continue to read and discard the rest of the request." Closing the connection is nice and immediate. Reading and discarding the rest of the request is fine as well, but assumes that the client will also behave nicely. If the next chunk looks like a valid request, then any ambiguity is on the shoulders of the client. However, since this would be a change in behavior from prior versions, it could break existing clients that are reliant upon the current buggy behavior. I agree that the safest course of action is to close the connection, and this is one of the options specified in the RFC, so that should be fine -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
