PWG> IPP> PRO> HTTP Connection: close

PWG> IPP> PRO> HTTP Connection: close

PWG> IPP> PRO> HTTP Connection: close

Carl Kugler kugler at us.ibm.com
Wed Sep 9 16:53:39 EDT 1998


I agree that the client and server must accept the Connection: close header.
I'm wondering how to satisfy the requirement that the client and server MUST
include this header for the last operation in a sequence of operations.
Specifically, how do the client and server know, a priori, that the current
operation is the last operation in a sequence (and therefore MUST include the Co
nnection: close header)?

 -Carl



rturner at sharplabs.com on 09/09/98 02:17:29 PM
Please respond to rturner at sharplabs.com
To: Carl Kugler/Boulder/IBM at ibmus
cc: ipp@@pwg.org
Subject: Re: PWG> IPP> PRO> HTTP Connection: close


I tend to follow the saying "Be conservative in what you send, and liberal in
what
you accept..."

Whether the text says MUST or not, IMHO we should be designing clients and
servers
to handle a "connection: close" header whenever it is received and still
function
normally, albeit with possibly less performance.

Since I am not working on a client, I cannot speak for what clients are or will
actually do, but I do think the client end should drive the connection status,
whevever possible.

Randy


Carl Kugler wrote:

> Section 4.1, General Headers, says
> General Header:  Connection
> "close" only. Both client and server SHOULD keep a connection for the
> duration of a sequence of operations. The client and server MUST include this
> header for the last operation in such a sequence.
> Consider the (presumably typical) case of an interactive IPP client with a
user
> interface.  How is the client to know when the current operation is the last
of
> a sequence of user-initiated actions?  Apparently, the only safe way to sat
isfy
> the MUST (an absolute requirement of the specification) would be to send
> "close" after each user-initiated action.  But this would violate the SHOULD,
> and is contrary to the recommendations of "HTTP Connection Management",
>  http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/http/draft-ietf-http-connection-00.txt
>
> Quoting:
>   "Authoritative knowledge that it is appropriate to close a connection
>    can only come from the user. Unfortunately, that source is not to be
>    trusted.  First, most users don't know what a connection is, and
>    having them indicate it is okay to close it is meaningless. Second, a
>    user that does know what a connection is probably inherently greedy.
>    Such a user would never surrender the attention that a connection to
>    a server implies.
> But this is talking about the client actually closing the connection, not
> sending a header to the server to signal that the connection will be closed
> after completion of the response. Obviously, the header can only be sent as
> part of a request.  Also, "HTTP Connection Management" says clients SHOULD
> close connections before servers when possible.
> How are you implementing this requirement?
>
>  -Carl,









More information about the Ipp mailing list