- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 16:21:40 +1000
- To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Sounds like a plan. On 15/09/2013, at 4:21 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 04:01:01PM +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> Document that they may not be persisted beyond a, because chunking (and therefore extensions) don't have any semantic in the message itself. Furthermore, that they're not available in most implementations. > > Probably it would be easier to remind that just like chunks themselves, > they're connection-specific, since any intermediary is allowed to > rechunk differently. It is also obvious that a compressing gateway > will rechunk for example. > > But I agree with Roy that it would be too bad to get rid of something > that most implementations can already parse (even if they don't use > them) and will continue to parse whatever we write in the spec, > especially if there is some potential for using them in the future. > > Willy > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 15 September 2013 06:22:08 UTC