- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 14:48:26 -0700
- To: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>, Roger Pantos <rpantos@apple.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, http-live-streaming-review <http-live-streaming-review@group.apple.com>, "Travis W. Brown" <travis@apple.com>, Steve Sinclair <steve.sinclair@apple.com>
At 22:55 +0200 2/08/09, Daniel Stenberg wrote: >On Sun, 2 Aug 2009, Roger Pantos wrote: > >>Similarly, we restrict our protocol to HTTP because more generality >>makes it too difficult to guarantee interoperability. > >Your restricting of access to your data only to HTTP doesn't make >your protocol any more HTTP (-like). The restriction to HTTP-only is >rather artificial and any implementer of this protocol would easily >be able to expand it to other application protocols (like for >example FTP), couldn't they? Or perhaps that new funky protocol >we'll invent two years into the future. > >In fact, I think the proposal would benefit from loosening its >fixation to HTTP. Hm. I don't know how to do that while still making it clear that the only transport the client is required to be able to parse and use is HTTP. Do you? -- David Singer Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Sunday, 2 August 2009 21:50:26 UTC