- From: Chuck Shotton <cshotton@biap.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 18:00:37 -0600
- To: Lou Montulli <montulli@mozilla.com>, Shel Kaphan <sjk@amazon.com>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
At 3:55 PM 11/13/95, Lou Montulli wrote:
>Shel Kaphan wrote:
>> Yes, on this, at least, I agree with you.
>>
>
>I would be happy with a good header proposal, but I wouldn't
>support a new method since byterange requests could apply
>to multiple methods. Brian's header proposal looks like a
>good start...
I'm certainly not advocating a new request method by any stretch. A simple
header that describes the "unit of measure" (e.g., byte) and the offset and
length info is more than sufficient. For that matter, simply moving the
proposed URL extensions into a header field would work. Anything in the
header has the added benefit of being non-trivial for browser users to
monkey with. I can think of lots of nasty scenarios where users misuse byte
range additions on URLs.
--_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Chuck Shotton StarNine Technologies, Inc.
chuck@starnine.com http://www.starnine.com/
cshotton@biap.com http://www.biap.com/
"Shut up and eat your vegetables!"
Received on Monday, 13 November 1995 16:09:00 UTC