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

Re: #540: "jumbo" frames

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 07:00:54 +0000
To: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
cc: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <30047.1403766054@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <CACweHNBGP2sd069AsoZoxL9pbm=f_s7q4MqKqGCrmpEcxFhL=A@mail.gmail.com>
, Matthew Kerwin writes:

>I think the current term for those sorts of optional features is
>"extensions." If you drafted a good one, I wouldn't oppose its adoption by
>the wg.

Getting rid of the CONTINUATION kludge is not an extension, that's a vast
improvement and reduction of complexity in the proposed protocol.


-- 
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 Thursday, 26 June 2014 07:01:17 UTC

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