- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:27:18 -0700
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, http-live-streaming-review <http-live-streaming-review@group.apple.com>
On 04/08/2009, at 3:04 PM, David Singer wrote: [ on CDNs] > We have. They were not receptive to supporting custom headers, much > less rearchitecting to supply arbitrary ranges of an infinitely- > growing resource out to the edge. That makes sense; I had been thinking more about the recorded broadcast use case, not live. Although in practice most streams won't be really infinite (and indeed archiving may be useful in *some* cases), it is a limitation for ranges. In theory, one could define a new, time-based range unit to address this, but I can understand why you'd be reluctant to do so, as it would take non-trivial work on the server. >> It would be extremely simple to add this information elsewhere; >> either in the format itself, or in headers. > > Getting something like this "implemented widely" enough to drive all > these changes is a chicken-and-egg problem that we are not out to > solve. We've had enough trouble getting people to support content- > range requests for progressive downloads, and that's been in the > standard for years. True. However, you've go a big iPhone-shaped hammer; I'd encourage you to use it -- if not here, perhaps elsewhere -- to push the limits a bit. [ On IPR] > Yes, we'll keep you updated on our public statements. Thanks. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 5 August 2009 16:27:57 UTC