- From: Henrik Nordström <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:28:47 +0100
- To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
mån 2012-02-06 klockan 12:05 -0800 skrev Ted Hardie: > Would you propose different method names for this mode, so that they > were distinguishable > to intermediaries, or would propose that the semantics of the method > be determined by > the transport on which it arrived? I would simply state that there is no guaranteed delivery status when HTTP/UDP is used. Messages MAY be silently lost when using such transport and it's up to to the application to handle it gracefully. How is outside of the specification. There is also other very noticeable limitations of HTTP/UDP such as maximum message size which is fairly small. I.e. 64KB on a good day. If reliable datagram transport is desired then use HTTP/SCTP. It's a very real alternative in the environments and for the applications where HTTP/UPD is interesting and provide much the same properties in unordered (but well defined) delivery of interleaved messages and other nice properties. Regards Henrik
Received on Monday, 6 February 2012 20:29:49 UTC