W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: chunk-extensions

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 11:23:24 +0200
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20130915092324.GC27487@1wt.eu>
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 10:44:32AM +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2013-09-15 08:21, Willy Tarreau 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.
> 
> Can you suggest concrete text?

Just doing a quick attempt :

@p1-23#4.1
-   Chunk extensions within the chunked transfer coding are deprecated.
-   Senders SHOULD NOT send chunk-ext.  Definition of new chunk
-   extensions is discouraged.
+   The current version of the HTTP specification defines no specific
+   use for the chunk extensions. When use of chunk extensions is
+   considered to transport anything (for example, chunks signatures),
+   care must be taken about the nature of the information present in
+   these extensions which by definition are hop-by-hop and not
+   end-to-end, as nothing prevents an intermediary from forwarding a
+   message with different size chunks, or even dropping or replacing
+   these extensions as well.

Willy
Received on Sunday, 15 September 2013 09:23:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:15 UTC