- From: <K.Morgan@iaea.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:34:06 +0000
- To: <fielding@gbiv.com>, <craig@ecaspia.com>
- CC: <goran.ap.eriksson@ericsson.com>, <bs7652@att.com>, <remy@lebeausoftware.org>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, <rodger@plexapp.com>, <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, <C.Brunhuber@iaea.org>
On Friday,15 April 2016 22:43, fielding@gbiv.com wrote: > Oh, never mind, now I see that you are referring to the second number being > fixed. > > I think I would prefer that be solved by allowing last-byte-pos to be empty, just > like it is for the Range request. I think such a fix is just as likely to be > interoperable as introducing a special range type (same failure cases). > > ....Roy +1000 A very similar idea was proposed before [1] as an I-D [2] by Rodger Coombs. We've also brought this up informally with other members of the WG. Alas, in our experience range requests don't seem to be a high priority :( For example, the problem of combining gzip with range requests is still unsolved [3]. [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2015AprJun/0122.html [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-combs-http-indeterminate-range-01 [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2014AprJun/1327.html This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system.
Received on Monday, 18 April 2016 07:34:50 UTC