- From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
- Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 00:37:02 +0300
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org WG" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 04:38:28PM +1000, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > Please have a look at the issues below; barring objections, I'll close them. > > Issues are linked from <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/report/15>. > > non-specific > #475 Strengthening SHOULDs Content-Range with PUT is used in the wild. Specifically, often to upload huge amounts of data (I have seen 36GB+ transfer lasting for days) with client being able to resume transfer from where it left off if the connection fails partway for any reason. Here's docs for one: https://developers.google.com/youtube/2.0/developers_guide_protocol_resumable_uploads And there are probably several inspired by that protocol (I'm aware of one such thing, that also happens to insta-400 any PUT without Content-Range). And I don't see how full and partial PUT could be confused, unless servers ignore Content-Range, which violates MUST-understand-or-reject requirement in RFC2616 (but that wouldn't really be surprising, given what happened to Expect) or client is just plain buggy (in which case all bets are off). -Ilari
Received on Friday, 27 September 2013 21:37:27 UTC