W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: [#95] Multiple Content-Lengths

From: 陈智昌 <willchan@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 13:57:00 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTino53kVpFD96ezn+YgWGe_uvR33o7cvnUsL1EsD@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
First bug report wrt to this change:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=59077.  Indeed, this is a
duplicate Content-Length (not mismatching).

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 3:57 PM, William Chan (陈智昌)
<willchan@chromium.org>wrote:

> No, I did not gather that information.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>
>> Any idea of how many of those were duplicates (ie not mismatching)?
>>
>>
>> On 08/10/2010, at 11:55 AM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> FWIW, on Windows Chrome 7.0.536.2 (a recent dev channel release), .0009%
>> of main frames (where an error would result in a user-visible Chrome network
>> error page, which we don't show for subresources) have responses with
>> multiple content-lengths.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:01 AM, William Chan (陈智昌) <<willchan@chromium.org>
>> willchan@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Adam Barth < <w3c@adambarth.com>
>>> w3c@adambarth.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:28 PM, William Chan (陈智昌)
>>>> < <willchan@chromium.org>willchan@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>> > From the brief discussion amongst the Chrome network developers, we
>>>> plan to
>>>> > discard the response and display an error.
>>>>
>>>> What sort of error message are you planing to display in the case that
>>>> Mark asked about (a CSS stylesheet with multiple Content-Length
>>>> headers)?
>>>>
>>>> Adam
>>>>
>>>
>>> I missed that comment.  That's an interesting point.  Unless bug reports
>>> / user metrics indicate this merits special handling, or we have confidence
>>> this is an attack rather than a buggy server, I'd have no current plans to
>>> treat it differently from any other network error, which gets logged and
>>> results in a resource load failure for WebKit.
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2010 20:57:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:29 GMT