- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:46:31 -0700
- To: "Fall, Kevin" <kfall@qualcomm.com>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 18/09/2012, at 10:05 AM, "Fall, Kevin" <kfall@qualcomm.com> wrote: > I think you do understand the use case. However, while I believe I > understand the original intent of Range, it seems to me it is a reasonable > if not elegant way to do "server driven" partial content. Indeed, would > you agree that the method I suggested above (client suggests multiple > ranges including (0-), (0-) would be "legal" to indicate to the server > that it is permitted to repond with multiple ranges of sizes chosen by the > server? The problem is that existing implementations in caches will interpret it in a different way, resulting in them serving a non-live stream (which is NOT what you want). Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 20:46:55 UTC