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

Re: p6: maximum delta-seconds of 2147483648

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 00:52:52 -0800
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3C609966-A6C6-473D-A2FB-3118B61848B7@gbiv.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
On Nov 15, 2013, at 12:38 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Probably that Roy's right. After all, if this is a specific value
>> then it makes sense to warn the developer about the fact he might
>> need to read the man or use strcmp(!).
> But this is true for parsing Content-Length as well, for instance. Do we need to state it there as well?

Oh, hell no ... we are only doing this for backwards compatibility
with a silly magic number that should never have been discussed in
the first place.  Protocols should never tell people how to program.

The sole purpose of the original text was to avoid overflows being
treated as negative numbers during Age calculations, and a sane
description would have simply said that (as did Jeff's original draft).
A specific number was suggested by committee, over-specification
commenced, and then it was rearranged into a generic section for
delta-seconds. Murphy's law at work.

Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 08:53:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:19 UTC