W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: HTTbis spec size, was: Rechartering HTTPbis

From: Henrik Nordström <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:07:50 +0100
Message-ID: <1328558870.30100.11.camel@home.henriknordstrom.net>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
mån 2012-02-06 klockan 11:03 -0800 skrev Ted Hardie:

> So, two of the transports you list above (UDP and DTLS) are unreliable; is
> reliability not a transport property you expect for HTTP message exchanges?

Depends on the message and application. The point here is that there is
no reason to confine HTTP to TCP. You obviously only use the UDP
transport when you know the network is in a good shape and when loosing
a message here and there is not a big deal, and there is several such

And DTLS is not by definition unreliable. It may be used alike over
unreliable transports such as UDP or over reliable message transports
such as SCTP. The reliability of the delivery in DTLS is a property of
it's underlying transport, not the DTLS protocol as such.

HTTP is a request/response message exchange protocol. At the high level
message level it's pretty ignorant about the transport.

Received on Monday, 6 February 2012 20:17:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:00 UTC