- From: Paul Leach <paulle@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 10:48:50 -0800
- To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>, "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> ---------- > From: Roy T. Fielding[SMTP:fielding@kiwi.ics.uci.edu] > Sent: Monday, January 05, 1998 10:52 AM > To: Jeffrey Mogul > Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com > Subject: Re: FW: Digest mess > > >One other reason: HTTP/1.1 includes the Content-MD5 header, which > >specifies the use of base64. Content-MD5 is optional (and perhaps > >not even particularly useful?), but its use of base64 is presumably > >a settled decision. > > Yep, a MIME inheritance. It turns out that Content-MD5 is not useful > at all for HTTP/1.1, since the combination of the error-free transport > layer and length-delimited content is sufficient. > "Error free" and "ones-complement checksum" are not 100% commensurate. Plus, the existence of proxies menas that the TCP "guarantee", such as it is, isn't in fact guaranteed anyway. The MD5 checksum is end-to-end, and much stronger than the transport checksum. .
Received on Thursday, 8 January 1998 14:50:41 UTC