W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > October 2002

RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 10:54:19 -0700
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D093740D0@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>, "Noah Mendelsohn" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "XMLP Dist App" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

>In this situation, I would prefer changing the default to keep 
>unprocessed header entries, and deferring the relaying into 
>modules where I think it really belongs; but I see how this 
>might be perceived as a big change.

I think there are scenarios that call for both ignored header blocks to
be removed and for them to be forwarded. An example of the former is
some hop-by-hop oriented feature, and an example of the latter is some
feature that isn't hop-by-hop specific.

IMO, it is not really a question of whether changing the default is a
big change or not but rather that it doesn't address both cases. For
example, having ignored header blocks be preserved would not allow me to
deploy an optional hop-by-hop compression algorithm.

A nice thing about the "relay" role proposal is that I get both
capabilities. This means that I can deploy an optional hop-by-hop
"compression" header block which is removed if ignored AND a "trace"
header block which is not removed if ignored.

Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2002 13:54:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:21 UTC