- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:27:07 +0100
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
* Mark Nottingham wrote: >* Separating the query string from the path would save the origin server >a bit of parsing. I see arguments on both sides; who wants to make them? Whether that is more, or less, work for the origin server depends quite a bit on the origin server. For instance, the origin server may have to concatenate the two prior to parsing because it can parse it only as one single string (as if often the case with simplistic ad-hoc parsers). I also see some potential for bugs and security vulnerabilities there, say how to handle a resource identifier with two question marks (a component might treat anything after the first question mark as query string, some middle component puts the parts back together, and then a legacy compo- nent only uses the part after the final question mark as query string). >* We'll need to do all of this for the response status code as well. >Maybe not the phrase; we touched on this briefly at the F2F, and I put >forth the opinion that since it's human-readable, and our message format >isn't really any more, it doesn't have much utility to actually include >in the message. Anyone think it's useful enough to justify the bits? I don't think they are useful on the wire, but standard names are quite useful in discussions and searches using your favourite search engine, so definitions for new codes, even when they are "HTTP/2-only", if there will be such codes at all, should still provide them. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 13:27:43 UTC