On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:08 AM Tommy Becker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Dridi, > Thanks for the response. I’m curious what specifically you believe to be in > violation of the spec here. There’s a lot of ambiguity to be had by my read, > but the option to send responses at any point seems pretty clear. From RFC > 7230 Section 6.5 > > A client sending a message body SHOULD monitor the network connection > for an error response while it is transmitting the request. If the > client sees a response that indicates the server does not wish to > receive the message body and is closing the connection, the client > SHOULD immediately cease transmitting the body and close its side of > the connection.
That's a SHOULD I didn't remember, that's why ;) > I should point out I initiated a thread on the Jetty mailing list on this > same topic prior to this one, and they (perhaps unsurprisingly) defend this > behavior. Greg Wilkins of the Jetty team asked me to relay this message in > particular: https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jetty-users/msg08611.html Thank you for relaying it. In the github issue you mentioned earlier I already suggested 100-continue support (mentioned by Greg Wilkins) in Varnish, but I wasn't aware/didn't remember the section you pasted. > As I mentioned in that thread, I have no horse in this race and just want to > solve my problem and perhaps spare others from this same issue, which was > rather tough to debug. Yes, and thank you for posting to the list. So this is neither a bug in Varnish or Jetty, and we don't use Github issues for feature requests. I will try to bring this up on Monday for the bugwash since this feature would be a latency win. Dridi _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
