W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1996

Re: 3.17.2 Byte Ranges

From: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 96 16:04:00 MDT
Message-Id: <9604252304.AA17641@acetes.pa.dec.com>
To: hardie@nasa.gov
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/345
    That is consistent with my reading, but it isn't really the case
    I was worried about.  Consider the case where a client sends
	    GET /foo.gif HTTP/1.1
	    Range: bytes = 1500-2047
    and foo.gif is only 1800 bytes long.  My reading is that right
    now the returned response would have a 
	    Content-Range: bytes 1500-1799/1800
    And the client would end up with the last 300 bytes, just as if a
	    Range bytes = 1500- had been sent.  
    It seems that we agree that isn't what we want,

No, I think this is acceptable behavior.

    and that if the byte
    range specified is out of bounds, the robustness prinicipal implies
    returning the *whole* entity.

I'm not sure about that last implication.  I think we really have
two choices:
	(1) the server returns a straightforward interpretation
	of what the client asked for, and if the client doesn't
	like it, the client can ask for something different.
	(2) the server tries to protect the client from receiving
	something that might or might not be what the client

Choice #2 seems to be unnecessarily restrictive.  Since the responses
are always unambiguously marked with a Content-Range header, there
is no danger (if we adopt choice #1) of confusing a properly implemented
client.  However, #2 runs the risk of requiring an extra round-trip
in a case where the client might actually be happy with the 1500-1799

If the client really does not want to receive a smaller range than
it asked for, it could do something like

	GET /foo.gif HTTP/1.1
	Range: bytes =1500-2047
	If-Valid: "xyzzy"

knowing that if there is any change in the size of /foo.gif, this
will change the validator and make this conditional request return
412 (Precondition Failed).

Using persistent-connection and pipelining, the client might even
send something like

	GET /foo.gif HTTP/1.1
	Range: bytes =1500-2047
	If-Valid: "xyzzy"
	HEAD /foo.gif HTTP/1.1
	If-Invalid: "xyzzy"

so that within one RTT it knows the current size of the object,
if it has changed (at the cost of a few more bytes on the wire).

      If the last-byte-pos value is present, it must be greater than or equal
      to the first-byte-pos in that byte-range-spec, or the byte-range-spec is
      invalid.  The recipient of an invalid byte-range-spec must ignore it.
    That the recipient of an invalid byte-range-spec ignored it by treating
    the request as if it did not contain a Range: header (once again, returning
    the whole entity on a GET request).  Am I misreading that?

I believe the intention behind this rule is to say that if a server
receives something obviously bogus like

	GET /foo.gif HTTP/1.1
	Range: 4-3

then it should return the whole entity rather than an error.   But
maybe the server should return 400 (Bad Request) in this case.

Received on Thursday, 25 April 1996 16:13:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:16 UTC