- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 13:56:39 +0200
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- CC: "William Chan (ιζΊζ)" <willchan@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-08-16 11:42, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <520DEE67.7000908@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes: >> On 2013-08-13 13:06, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >>> In message <520A112B.7010200@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes: >>>> On 2013-08-13 09:37, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >>> >>>> I believe what you say is based on the point of view of a very specific >>>> component. >>> >>> I say this from the perspective I hold on HTTP/2.0: >>> >>> 1 Tbit/s per machine or it doesn't matter. >> >> Again: what does this have to do with the size of the vocabulary? > > It has something to do with how much work you have to do to find > out how to treat/route a request. How does the existence of extension methods makes that *harder*? If people tunnel through POST you will have to inspect custom headers and/or payloads to get the same information. Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 16 August 2013 11:57:06 UTC