- From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 11:35:53 +0100
- To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Cc: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, Joe Orton <joe@manyfish.co.uk>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > > partial or absolute detection ? If the format allows multiple concatenated > > entries, and integrity check is true if you reach exactly the end of one > > entry, you have a highly probable integrity check but not an absolute one. > > You don't hav an absolute one even if Content-Length matches or chunked > encoding is terminated proper. It all depends on where the failure was > and how communication was to that.. Agree, except we can at least identify when it's not the protocol itself introducing undetected failure. > In any situation where there may be > some form or proxy inbetween (including servers running scripts) both > Content-Length and chunking is synthetic and hop-by-hop. As recipient > you can only be absolutely sure that if there is a mismatch then > something is wrong.. According to RFC2616, Content-Length is an entity header and an end-to-end header, therefore should not be synthesised hop-by-hop. Yeah, I know :-) -- Jamie
Received on Monday, 2 June 2008 10:36:34 UTC