W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2008

Not UDP? Re: Proposed HTML ping attribute

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:59:40 -0500
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <F6750915-0746-4526-B6EA-B4399487F606@w3.org>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>

Presumably it has been discussed why UDP should not be used?
It would seem to have the right characteristics.
It would have less load on the net, by many times.
And dramatically reduce time, buffer space etc for all parties.
And it could be filtered out as a luxury on links under abnormal stress.
Anyone got a pointer to the reasons? why not?


On 2008-01 -15, at 22:37, Mark Baker wrote:

> Hi David,
> On 1/15/08, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
>>> 2) He notes that while some particular resources may indeed  
>>> interpret
>>> empty body posts in the intended manner, others may not.  If we  
>>> understand
>>> him correctly, Roy is suggesting that a malicious (or negligent)  
>>> author
>>> of  Web pages with ping attributes could "trick" a user into  
>>> causing such
>>> a  POST to be sent to a resource that would interpret it in ways  
>>> that were
>>> destructive.
>> Does this introduce anything that form.submit() can't already do?
> No, but it makes that bad practice (invoking form.submit() as the
> direct result of a link click) more accessible to more developers.
> That's not good.
> BTW, I'm not against <a ping>, I'm just against the use of POST on the
> ping URI - GET would be fine.
> Mark.
> -- 
> Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
> Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 03:59:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:19 UTC