- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 14:08:59 +1000
- To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Cc: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-early-hints@ietf.org, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 4 August 2017 at 14:01, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote: > Hi Kazuho, > > On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:49:13PM +0900, Kazuho Oku wrote: >> Eric, Martin, Willy, thank you for your suggestions. >> >> I agree that the original text was incorrect in the limitation of what >> can be pushed, and also that the text was confusing. >> >> I've filed a PR (https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/375) >> that tries to address the issue, based on Martin's suggestions (thank >> you for the text!). >> >> Please let me know what you think. > > I'd reformulate this part : > > "especially if a client is associated with a large amount of cache storage." > > more like this : > > "especially if for clients equipped with caching." > > Otherwise it makes one think that Link header consumes a large amount of > space while it's 1) not true and 2) only a hint so it solely depends on > what the client does. I think that Willy's suggestion is good. I'm also not sure about "and consumes less bandwidth", which is only true in the case where the client doesn't want the resource.
Received on Friday, 4 August 2017 04:09:22 UTC