[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: HTTP client q
My read is 1.0 not valid 1.1 must have for non persistent (aka no Connection: Keep-Alive) I don't have a mapping of that to "more advanced API" you speak of. a. On 14 Nov 2012, at 17:33, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: > To the HTTP heads out there, is it ok for a single HTTP request (no > pipelining) to always include "Connection: close" in the headers? > > In Cohttp, we currently don't do this, and it appears that every single > client has to include the header, or risk the other side not closing the > connection cleanly. > > I'm modifying Cohttp to always send the Connection header when a single > get/put/post/head request is issued, but *not* when the more advanced > pipeline API calls are used. Does this sound sane? > > -anil Relevant extract RFC2616 *and there might be something more recent, I can't find ight now, it is not clear that the follower RFCs explicitly obsolete this. HTTP/1.1 defines the "close" connection option for the sender to signal that the connection will be closed after completion of the response. For example, Connection: close in either the request or the response header fields indicates that the connection SHOULD NOT be considered `persistent' (section 8.1) after the current request/response is complete. HTTP/1.1 applications that do not support persistent connections MUST include the "close" connection option in every message. A system receiving an HTTP/1.0 (or lower-version) message that includes a Connection header MUST, for each connection-token in this field, remove and ignore any header field(s) from the message with the same name as the connection-token. This protects against mistaken forwarding of such header fields by pre-HTTP/1.1 proxies. See section 19.6.2. 14.11
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |