- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 06:50:45 +0000
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- cc: Nicholas Hurley <hurley@todesschaf.org>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <CABkgnnUTMTfR51hZJ__CpDWA0C8pG6HHBih9HVgKoZ=WH5AS=A@mail.gmail.com>, Martin Thomson w rites: >On 11 July 2014 14:53, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: >> If 256 bytes is enough for basic interop, we shouldn't require more. > >I find this reasonably convincing. Interoperability is what we are >looking for here. > >An alternative approach would be to set the default and minimum to the >same value. That has other benefits, like being able to completely >ignore a setting from the other side. That seems pretty attractive. There were no default in our proposal, only a minimum and a MUST that 16k *can* be configured. I don't see any reason, nor any gain, by forcing a server to accept 16K (compressed!) header-sets by default, if the application it runs is never ever going to be subject to valid requests larger than 3K ? Who would benefit from that ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Saturday, 12 July 2014 06:51:10 UTC