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

Re: Getting to Consensus: CONTINUATION-related issues

From: Robert Collins <robertc@squid-cache.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:30:29 +1200
Message-ID: <CAJ3HoZ3rC=FQ+deNKf20X8Tospd_Aru0wMjGyLzZXOp3psJxVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 18 Jul 2014 12:47, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> 1) Your preferred outcome (if any)

A for ease of implementation. Also because unlimited size requests are
already de facto broken in 1.1 due to intermediaries like squid having
fixed upper limits on parsing.

> 2) Whether you can live with the other option, and if not, why

I can live with b

> "I have no preference" is useful information too.
>
> If you indicate you can't live with one (or both) of the options, you
MUST give a detailed, relevant reason as to why; omitting the reason means
your "can't live with" will be ignored.
>
> Thanks,
>
> P.S. Please state *your* preference, not what you think the WG can live
with.
>
> P.P.S. This is not a call for more discussion; please resist replying to
others' preferences.
>
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 18 July 2014 05:30:57 UTC

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