- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 07:26:41 +0200
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Matt Menke <mmenke@google.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 10:26:04PM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >And what about #4 consisting in indicating the encoding in the header > >field *name* instead > > That's quite a hack, isn't it ? Not that much after all when you think about it, because our parsers will have to consider the field name to know how to decode the value. Content-length will remain integer for example. Thus new fields could be classified by their name using a prefix for easier sorting/testing. > I'd prefer not to complicate things that way if I can... Same for me, don't worry, which is why I'm only suggesting :-) Willy
Received on Sunday, 16 October 2016 05:27:11 UTC