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

Re: Getting to Consensus: CONTINUATION-related issues

From: Jason Greene <jason.greene@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:57:57 -0500
Cc: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>, Nicholas Hurley <hurley@todesschaf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1B2049BF-EA6F-4853-B865-356A0448877A@redhat.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>

On Jul 18, 2014, at 12:17 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 18 July 2014 10:07, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com> wrote:
>> Nothing has been said about a required rollback capability, and I can't find any mention of rollback on the linked wiki page either.
> Say you have a block of headers that you need to encode for sending.
> You discover that you exceed the limit only after performing the
> encoding up to the point that you exceed the limit.  At that point,
> you can't send the block.  And all the changes that have been applied
> to the header table need to be backed out.

Right so to address this you would need to check if the uncompressed size > compressed limit, and if so either do a first pass length compute or a temporary copy of the state table. 

Itís extra complexity, but the implementation isnít difficult (a cake walk compared to other aspects of the spec). I can certainly appreciate the perspective from implementations that donít want to touch their code though.
Jason T. Greene
WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
Received on Friday, 18 July 2014 17:58:30 UTC

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