Re: [whatwg/fetch] keepalive: Do we need to restrict the number of requests at a time? (#662)

Doesn’t that make any limit on sendBeacon() silly if it doesn’t account for
that? I agree, though, that we should carefully consider that.

To clarify my concerns: Implementations are limited in the strategies they
can employ - they can enqueue in memory, thus growing memory usage, or they
can back to disk, consuming disk usage. In both cases, implementations will
be bounded both by what is reasonable for their constraints and what does
not impair user experience or expectations.

However, I also acknowledge that any explicit quota creates issues both for
interop and for visibility - interop is affected if developers cannot
discover or detect the limits, while exposing that potentially reveals
cross-origin information, such as the size of responses other origins are
enqueuing. This applies to sendBeacon and keepalive, but I don’t think it
applies to sync XHR - which is unfortunate in many ways.

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 7:04 PM Anne van Kesteren <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> Note that they can stuff information in headers and URLs too, so you might
> be looking at much more than 1 mebibyte.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you commented.
>
>
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/662#issuecomment-357753371>, or mute
> the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABayJ4s2Sxif98k1EYEFZZRQH467mn8oks5tK5MogaJpZM4ReaZf>
> .
>


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/issues/662#issuecomment-357754908