W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: I-D Action: draft-lnageleisen-http-chunked-progress-00.txt

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 14:14:39 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVxV+vH0uqFDDeRmQR2mAPuUw7q0uB0zbih+Wb1e2qYCA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 8 April 2014 09:19, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:
> * internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>>Abstract:
>>   This document describes Chunked Progress, an extension to
>>   Transfer-Encoding: Chunked as defined in RFC2616 [RFC2616].  Chunked
>>   Progress introduces a backwards-compatible, RFC2616 compliant method
>>   to notify the client of transfer advancement in situations where the
>>   server has knowledge of progress but cannot know the resource size
>>   ahead of time.
>
>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lnageleisen-http-chunked-progress-00
>
> FYI. Ideas like this have been discussed in the past on the HTTP WG
> list, and the Webapps list in contexts related to progress events.

Yep.

Chunk extensions aren't deprecated, but they also aren't used.  They
aren't going to be available in HTTP/2.

Presumably, the cases where data is actively being transmitted aren't
of interest, it's the cases where data is not flowing that need the
extra info.  Historically, those have been addressed over the top:
using different resources.  That works pretty well for
non-intermediated cases.  Some alternative proposals used 1xx series
codes, which - like this proposal - wouldn't work in HTTP/2.
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2014 21:15:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:29 UTC