* natural ordering of the elements, if there is no comparator) to test element equality. As a
 * result, if the comparator is not consistent with equals, some of the standard implementations may
 * violate the {@code Set} contract.
 *
 * <p>The {@code standard} methods and the collection views they return are not guaranteed to be
 * thread-safe, even when all of the methods that they depend on are thread-safe.
 *

  }
}
```

### Rewriting Responses

Symmetrically, interceptors can rewrite response headers and transform the response body. This is generally more dangerous than rewriting request headers because it may violate the webserver's expectations!

Similarly, the reader thread must never block on writing because this can deadlock the connection. Consider a client and server that both violate this rule. If you get unlucky, they could fill up their TCP buffers (so that writes block) and then use their reader threads to write a frame. Nobody is reading on either end, and the buffers are never drained.

#### Do-stuff-later pool

   * level than the whole method but without performing a runtime null check. That way, we can still
   * pass null inputs to LegacyConverter, and it can violate the contract of Converter.
   *
   * TODO(cpovirk): Could this be simplified if we modified implementations of LegacyConverter to
   * override methods (probably called "unsafeDoForward" and "unsafeDoBackward") with the same

 * elements, if there is no comparator) to test element equality. As a result, if the comparator is
 * not consistent with equals, some of the standard implementations may violate the {@code Set}
 * contract.
 *
 * <p>The {@code standard} methods and the collection views they return are not guaranteed to be
 * thread-safe, even when all of the methods that they depend on are thread-safe.
 *

 * elements, if there is no comparator) to test element equality. As a result, if the comparator is
 * not consistent with equals, some of the standard implementations may violate the {@code Set}
 * contract.
 *
 * <p>The {@code standard} methods and the collection views they return are not guaranteed to be
 * thread-safe, even when all of the methods that they depend on are thread-safe.
 *

 * elements, if there is no comparator) to test element equality. As a result, if the comparator is
 * not consistent with equals, some of the standard implementations may violate the {@code Map}
 * contract.
 *
 * <p>The {@code standard} methods and the collection views they return are not guaranteed to be
 * thread-safe, even when all of the methods that they depend on are thread-safe.
 *

   * level than the whole method but without performing a runtime null check. That way, we can still
   * pass null inputs to LegacyConverter, and it can violate the contract of Converter.
   *
   * TODO(cpovirk): Could this be simplified if we modified implementations of LegacyConverter to
   * override methods (probably called "unsafeDoForward" and "unsafeDoBackward") with the same

   * Returns -1 if no further cleanups are required.
   */
  fun closeConnections(now: Long): Long {
    // Compute the concurrent call capacity for each address. We won't close a connection if doing
    // so would violate a policy, unless it's OLD.
    val addressStates = this.addressStates
    for (state in addressStates.values) {
      state.concurrentCallCapacity = 0
    }
    for (connection in connections) {

 * elements, if there is no comparator) to test element equality. As a result, if the comparator is
 * not consistent with equals, some of the standard implementations may violate the {@code Map}
 * contract.
 *
 * <p>The {@code standard} methods and the collection views they return are not guaranteed to be
 * thread-safe, even when all of the methods that they depend on are thread-safe.
 *