- From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 11:11:54 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Dave Kristol <dmk@bell-labs.com>
- Cc: mogul@pa.dec.com, http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
> I believe the argument against a bit-bucket is that the server has to waste > resources to consume the incoming bits, and network bandwidth gets wasted at a > time when we're trying to reduce HTTP-induced network bandwidth. It's hard to > know how much of a problem either of these *really* is. Does anyone have > numbers for how often servers reject PUT/POST because they can't accept the > content? My guess is it's not a big problem yet. Can we afford to defer the > solution until it is? > > Dave Kristol The most frequent case for our implementation at least will, I suspect, be when the server has configured different realms for serving and submitting a form. This turns out to be a common situation in an embedded system because it saves memory and simplifies interface design; the same page is used to display current configuration information and to change it, but the authentication required is different.
Received on Monday, 21 April 1997 08:15:25 UTC