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

Re: draft-kfall-httpbis-server-ranges [was: Preliminary agenda for Atlanta]

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:13:33 +1300
Message-ID: <5089F1CD.4010907@treenet.co.nz>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 26/10/2012 11:55 a.m., Adrien W. de Croy wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Fall, Kevin"
>> That is one case, but perhaps more interesting/controversial is this 
>> one:
>>
>> Range: bytes=100-
>>
>> Content-Range: bytes 200-300/1000.
>>
>
> I'm struggling to see the point of this.
>
> What real world case would something like this solve?  Presumably the 
> client would need to request 100-200 again?  If not, then why even 
> deal in bytes and part ranges like this at all?
>

Squid would potentially implement this.

* stale-while-revalidate and stale-if-error could use cached but not 
quite matching range entities to respond while the upstream request is 
being processed.

  *  our "collaped forwarding" feature has some issues with late 
arriving requests when the start of the response entity has been 
discarded from buffer already. Currently we are forced to re-fetch. This 
would permit the some Range requests to be served despite missing chunks 
of entity.

Amos
Received on Friday, 26 October 2012 02:14:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 26 October 2012 02:14:08 GMT