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

Re: #540: "jumbo" frames

From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:05:43 +1000
Message-ID: <CAH_y2NFTCuG1=8QZRZRsG5D9j+uYuLxCC_LqdcuRz1fD8wZjFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nicholas Hurley <hurley@todesschaf.org>
Cc: Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, IETF HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 11 July 2014 09:40, Nicholas Hurley <hurley@todesschaf.org> wrote:

> I see no convincing technical reasons in that list to make it a built-in
> part of the protocol. It reads to me more like a list of "this would be
> nice", which sounds just perfect for an extension.


Making it an extension does not allow CONTINUATIONS to be removed from the
protocol.   That puts it into other that "this would be nice" category.

You can't remove parts of the protocol in an extension.

regards





-- 
Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>
http://eclipse.org/jetty HTTP, SPDY, Websocket server and client that scales
http://www.webtide.com  advice and support for jetty and cometd.
Received on Friday, 11 July 2014 01:06:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC