- From: Simone Bordet <simone.bordet@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 20:06:52 +0200
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi, On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3 June 2014 01:56, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote: >> One solution would be for load balancers to always reject streams with >> continuation frames. This would work perfectly well for 99.9% of traffic. >> So one may ask why are continuation frames in the spec? > > This would be a bad idea. The existence of continuations is largely > orthogonal to header size. You might as well reject requests based on > whether the current date when converted to RGB is a colour you don't > like. Such behaviour leads to the sorts of perversions clients are > forced to do to get HTTP/1.1 requests working today. Sorry, I don't understand the date/RGB simile. Can you please expand in a more technical way the arguments of why it is a bad idea, and how the existence of continuations is orthogonal to header size ? Making examples would help. Thanks ! -- Simone Bordet http://bordet.blogspot.com --- Finally, no matter how good the architecture and design are, to deliver bug-free software with optimal performance and reliability, the implementation technique must be flawless. Victoria Livschitz
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2014 18:07:19 UTC