W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: New Version Notification for draft-kamp-httpbis-structure-01.txt (fwd)

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:27:31 +0000
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <83691.1479378451@critter.freebsd.dk>
--------
In message <20161117101727.GB10016@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes:
>On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 09:48:16AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

>> Trust me:  We will never care about *timestamps* with sub-microsecond
>> resolution in HTTP headers. They barely make sense in the first
>> place and transmission noise and and delays will totally swamp any
>> information they might carry.
>
>That's inexact, I've already seen people using timestamps as an easy
>way to have unique IDs.

And I've seen people use ieee754 binary floating point for
currency values...

Remember that this is laregly a forward looking thing.

People who specify HTTP headers with CS should use "identifier"
for values which are supposed to be unique IDs, because that
allow smarter people to stuff an UUID in there.

>There's nothing wrong with asking for one GB of data starting at 1.23 PB.

That's true.

That is a good argument for having a 64 bit "integer" type.

-- 
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 Thursday, 17 November 2016 10:28:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 17 November 2016 10:28:03 UTC