Re: [Beacon] Required Beacon-Age: handling.

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 10:59 AM, David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, until there is a bug and some UA omits it by accident (or
>> intentionally), at which point I'm back to UA detection: if X UA then no
>> delay, if Y UA then I don't trust the timestamp... at which point, I guess
>> I would need to move that detection into JS-land and pick the method that I
>> trust.
>>
>
> Firefox appears to already ship sendBeacon without the Beacon-Age header
> anyway. (I imagine their implementation predates the header.)
>

Yes, but they landed a fix for that since and first shipped version had no
delay. But your point still stands.

tl;dr: I'm ok with omitting it. Just trying to think of cases where we
might regret this decision later :)

Received on Monday, 18 August 2014 18:08:20 UTC