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

Re: Range Requests vs Content Codings

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:11:13 +0000
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1378.1403082673@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <53A123AD.8090503@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes:

>Intermediaries that fail for unknown range units are broken, no?

No, they may simply know something about the origin you do not, and
decide that delivering the full object is the way to satisfy the request.

>> - What benefits does standardising a range-unit bring this use case (over just using application-specific semantics)?
>
>That it would work with standard software such as httpd, static files, 
>and a new module?

That will only happen if people need it enough to ask for it to be
implemented.  Very few people tail gzip'ed logfiles.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 10:01:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC