- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 09:44:10 +0000
- To: "Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net>
- cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
-------- Martin Thomson writes: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021, at 19:22, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > If we want enable that, we should move *all* headers and status to the > > trailer, so that no confusion is possible. > > Oddly, I agree, though this comes with a whole lot of problems with message processing at intermediaries and whatnot. I'm not sure I see any _major_ problems. If the client has indicated it can do 142, a non-policy intermediary can just pass stuff along, and that realizes the full production/transmission overlap. Once the trailers arrive, the intermediary can decide if it wants to cache the object for future requests. A policy intermediary will need to buffer the entire response before it can do its politiking (unless out-of-band information has given it other options.) Usually that would be a CDN close to the eventual consumer or a corporate smut-filter, so almost the entire overlap will still be realized. But yes, there will be implementation details. > > The final bit is for requestors to indicate that they grok 142, I would > > be willing to abuse Accept-Encoding for that: > > > > Accept-Encoding: gzip, brotli, 142 > > Isn't this sort of thing what TE was originally designed for? Good point. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2021 09:44:26 UTC