Subject: Re: #288: Considering messages in isolation

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 22:04:54 +0200

On 2011-07-01 06:58, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Revised proposal:
>
> """
> Recipients MUST consider every message in a connection in isolation; because HTTP is a stateless protocol, it cannot be assumed that two requests on the same connection are from the same client or share any other common attributes. In particular, intermediaries might mix requests from different clients into a single server connection. Note that some existing HTTP extensions (e.g., [RFC4559]) violate this requirement, thereby potentially causing interoperability and security problems.
> """
 > ...

Sounds good to me; will update the spec accordingly.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:14:19 +0200

On 2011-07-03 22:04, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Recipients MUST consider every message in a connection in isolation;
>> because HTTP is a stateless protocol, it cannot be assumed that two
>> requests on the same connection are from the same client or share any
>> other common attributes. In particular, intermediaries might mix
>> requests from different clients into a single server connection. Note
>> that some existing HTTP extensions (e.g., [RFC4559]) violate this
>> requirement, thereby potentially causing interoperability and security
>> problems.
>> """
>  > ...
>

Done with <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1324> 
(and yes, the checkin comment is a typo).

Best regards, Julian