W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1998

Re: CHUNKEDTRAILERS, attempted fix 2

From: Dave Kristol <dmk@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 00:16:56 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199808270416.AAA20042@aleatory.research.bell-labs.com>
To: fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu, mogul@pa.dec.com
Cc: http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/359
Just to add a real data point to the discussion:

In handling Digest, my server decides whether to send qop="auth" or
qop="auth,auth-int" in a challenge based on whether it knows that the
client can handle chunked+trailers, since I send Authentication-Info as
a chunked trailer always.  If you think it through, you see the
message sequence is

1) C->S
    Get resource R
2) S->C
    401 Authentication Required
    send qop="auth" or qop="auth,auth-int" based on client's ability to
    handle chunked+trailers
3) C->S
    Get resource R
    WWW-Authenticate ... qop=auth or qop=auth-int
4) S->C
    200 OK
    send R, possibly chunked and with trailers for qop=auth-int

Therefore, if the server can decide at step (2) whether it's safe
to send trailers, there shouldn't be a problem.

I can live with Roy's Via proposal or the TE: trailers proposal.  Both
should let me tell whether it's safe to send trailers.

Dave Kristol
Received on Wednesday, 26 August 1998 21:20:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:23 UTC