-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 101
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
100-continue question for Creation with Upload #151
Comments
Good point. The Creation With Upload extension does not require the use of |
I'm not sure I'm following you. In the paragraph of Creation With Upload, it explicitly states:
Based on that paragraph, if one wants to use the Creation with Upload, then they do need to include the It also notes that the client should get a response from the server on whether it accepts the creation request before attempting to transfer the first chunk, which is consistent to the description in sec 8.2.3, of rfc2616-sec8. So the response of the server is also not consistent to the quoted paragraph above. Because it wouldn't have yet received the first chunk when it sends the response. It has to first send the response to the client before the client sends the first chunk. So having an Further, although the section on Creation With Upload does not mention that the response sent by the server has to have the I think this section on Creation With Upload is missing a bit more on the sequence of events, in that as noted by sec 8.2.3, of rfc2616-sec8:
For completeness, the section on Creation With Upload should provide the whole sequence of events that involves this interaction. A sequence diagram would be very helpful. |
Ok, I think there is a confusion in your side:
If the tus spec says "the Client SHOULD verify that it is supported by the Server" we are referring to sending an
I agree. Although the spec does not require the use, it's always helpful to add it. Would you be willing to open a PR for this? |
I'm not suggesting the precheck is related to the 100-continue. The sentence your quoting, yes, that refers to checking on what the server supports by sending an OPTIONS request, but that's not the sentence I quoted. For clarity, let me quote the whole paragraph in question:
Yes, the first sentence does refer to the OPTIONS request, to check if the the server has the But the 2nd sentence of the rest of that paragraph (which is the one I had quoted in my previous post), refers to the POST request, since it talks about the client waiting for the server's response "before attempting to transfer the first chunk" . And it is in that 2nd sentence that notes that Further, we also know the 2nd sentence doesn't refer to an OPTIONS request, because an OPTIONS request never includes a If that quoted paragraph is confusing, then maybe it should be broken down to two paragraphs. But then again, I never interpreted the precheck (first sentence of that paragraph) to be related to the rest of that paragraph (where it speaks about where the So going back to my original point, based on that 2nd sentence, this is what I'm pointing out:
And yes, I would create a PR to include a sequence diagram, since I think there's a bit more interaction going on with Creation with Upload than what is shown in this document, and as suggested by sec 8.2.3, of rfc2616-sec8, but it looks like I lack permissions to create a PR ... that is the PR button creation is greyed out for me (or can you refer me to the correct place to create it?). |
Thank you very much for the clarification. I think I figured out what our differences were and I agree with you. You can start a new PR by editing the |
So in the discussion of Creation With Upload, in the example provided, the POST request seems to be missing the
Expect: 100-continue
as noted in the paragraph above the example. Further the response seems not quite consistent with the 100-continue use, as laid out by rfc2616-sec8, sec 8.2.3, where it states concerning the server's response:So going back to the example given in Creation With Upload,, the response was this:
To be consistent to the quoted paragraph above, the response should not include the upload-offset because the server hasn't yet read the body, since the protocol is that it must first reply to the request before attempting to read the body and that response is suppose to just contain the 100 (Continue) status, no?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: