W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: i28 proposed replacement text

From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 21:19:38 +0200
To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: Joe Orton <joe@manyfish.co.uk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1212002378.14979.11.camel@henriknordstrom.net>

On ons, 2008-05-28 at 10:41 -0400, Yves Lafon wrote:

> Then we must at least say that the encoding used (not chunked) must 
> give the same characteristics as chunked wrt detection of the end of the 
> message.

Why? The protocol will not fall down if a message is unexpectedly cut

A note mentioning that this may downgrade the message integrity to the
level of a Connection: close without Content-Length message may be
acceptable, but not a must. In practice most file formats and encodings
easily detect truncation.

> Is this particular case really used in deployed client/servers, and done 
> the right way ?

As already mentioned both gzip and deflate has this property to a
sufficient level.

Received on Wednesday, 28 May 2008 19:20:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:46 UTC