httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacob Champion <champio...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: On the Upgrade request body limit
Date Tue, 08 Dec 2015 23:27:46 GMT
On 12/08/2015 03:01 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> Jacob,
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic.dev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> As I read the RFC, the simple(st) case is:
>> Request (upgrade: somespec) -> request body <- 101 (upgrade: somespec)
>> <- new protocol response or read
>
> Wouldn't that work for the WebSocket case?
> If the new protocol wants to read after the Switch I don't think
> anything prevents it...
> The headers included in the 101 response could be set by a hook.

Sorry I'm responding so slowly; I'm trying to grok all the responses 
before I reply, and they're coming in fast. ;)

Yes, this works fine for the WebSocket case. WebSocket is easier because 
WebSocket upgrades are only allowed for the GET method and there is no 
request body (that I have to worry about, anyway).

The motivation for my original post wasn't WebSocket. I made it with the 
assumption (provided by Stefan) that the h2c upgrade is more limited 
than other protocol upgrades in how big a request body it can handle; 
i.e. that the specs themselves painted mod_http2 into a corner. If that 
assumption is incorrect, and there's a way for it to use the same limit 
as every other request, then I think my discussion point is moot.

--Jacob

Mime
View raw message