W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: WGLC: p5 multiple Range headers

From: Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 14:14:02 -0400
Message-ID: <51645A6A.8060306@andrew.cmu.edu>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 4/9/13 1:38 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2013-04-03 22:48, Ken Murchison wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Per
>> https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/httpbis/draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p1-messaging.html#field.order 
>>
>> multiple Range header fields aren't allowed due to the field value
>> containing more than just a comma-separated list (bytes-unit). That
>> being said, there was a discussion on the public-media-fragment@w3.org
>> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-fragment/2009Sep/0064.html> 
>>
>> list a few years ago about multiple Range header fields, and in that
>> thread Yves didn't state that multiple Range header fields are 
>> prohibited.
>
> Well, he should have :-)
>
>> I'm wondering if this was an oversight or if multiple Range header
>> fields actually appear in the wild and clients expect it to work. If
>> they are allowed, then the Range header needs to be called out as an
>> exception in p1.  If not, was this thread just an isolated instance of
>> confusion, or is it worth adding text to p5 to explicitly state that
>> only one Range header is allowed?
>
> I believe it was just an instance of confusion, and I'd prefer that 
> the spec doesn't restate things all over the place..

OK.  I had already made the decision to support only one Range header in 
my CalDAV/CardDAV server.

-- 
Kenneth Murchison
Principal Systems Software Engineer
Carnegie Mellon University
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2013 20:34:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:12 UTC