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

Re: CONTINUATION was: #540: "jumbo" frames

From: Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 18:13:15 -0500
Message-ID: <CAPHPUs++uwCxBGkmpKgPuR0RGUSG7Z63tnoj+dE=zWMpeM7v1Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: "K.Morgan@iaea.org" <K.Morgan@iaea.org>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
> The same applies here.  We're chartered to define a protocol that can
> carry HTTP.  We already have evidence that >16K of headers is
> sometimes used.  And that is enough reason to provide support.
> Period.

Which is fine, but why not support that oft cited questionable need
through an extension as opposed to a seemingly largely reviled
CONTINUATION mechanism?

cheers,
jesse
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2014 23:14:02 UTC

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