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

Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-21, "3.2 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable"

From: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:52:03 -0500
Message-ID: <CACuKZqHoiNmcfa=E1nRzGGrdh2i7EuBWBP01ehNk950WhNiVVg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Wouldn't "Content-Type: multipart/byteranges" cause confusions if it's
used anywhere other than in a 206 response?

Suppose a representation itself has the content type of "multipart/byteranges"

    Get /slivers HTTP/1.1


    HTTP/1.1 200 OK
    Content-Type: multipart/byteranges

That's pretty confusing for observers. Even more confusingly

    Get/slivers HTTP/1.1
    Range: bytes=0-499


    HTTP/1.1 206 Partial Content
    Content-Type: multipart/byteranges
    Content-Range: bytes 0-499/1234

Maybe we should strongly discourage the use of multipart/byteranges in
any application except in a HTTP 206 response.

Zhong Yu



On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p5-range-21.html#status.416>:
>
> "When this status code is returned for a byte-range request, the response
> SHOULD include a Content-Range header field specifying the current length of
> the representation (see Section 5.2). This response MUST NOT use the
> multipart/byteranges content-type. For example,"
>
> What is this "MUST NOT" about? Are there clients that will ignore the status
> code and assume success if they see the expected content-type?
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 15:52:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 October 2012 15:52:41 GMT