- From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>
- Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 21:44:01 +0200
- To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>
- Cc: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, "Nicolas Mailhot" <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Le Dim 8 avril 2012 14:50, Adrien W. de Croy a écrit : >>>3. a way to signal the web client a request is being processed (there is no >>>way a multi-GB iso is going to pass through the anti-malware system >>>instantaneously, and users will press retry if the download bar does not >>> move >>>after a few seconds) >>That sounds like serious scope-creep to me. Unfortunately a single user that pressed refresh half a dozen times because he's not seeing progress on its multi-GB file can consume as much in a few minutes as a normal user would over weeks. > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decroy-http-progress-04 > > We actually deployed a similar (evolved version) to this in WinGate 7. > If you install the AV plugin (free trials available for both), download > a big file and throw it a progress header. We patched Chromium source > to get the client working. It actually works really well. Certainly > stops human timeouts. > > We didn't test it via a bunch of other proxies though. > > I've an outstanding task to write up the modified protocol (contrary to > that I-D it uses 103, name=value pairs, and only sends deltas). Could you clean it up and get it included in HTTP/2 ? That's the only way to get it implemented by browsers and proxies. Thanks! -- Nicolas Mailhot
Received on Sunday, 8 April 2012 19:44:36 UTC