Re: Resumable Uploads

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Fri, 19 April 2013 11:43 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A01B21F95E3 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mjW-6w2JkUyC for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B439521F95D0 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 04:43:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UT9j1-0005XD-89 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:43:31 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:43:31 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UT9j1-0005XD-89@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <daniel@haxx.se>) id 1UT9iy-0005WY-5l for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:43:28 +0000
Received: from giant.haxx.se ([80.67.6.50]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <daniel@haxx.se>) id 1UT9ix-0007WX-1D; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:43:28 +0000
Received: from giant.haxx.se (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by giant.haxx.se (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2) with ESMTP id r3JBgsge006657 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:42:54 +0200
Received: from localhost (dast@localhost) by giant.haxx.se (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) with ESMTP id r3JBgrRC006652; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:42:54 +0200
X-Authentication-Warning: giant.haxx.se: dast owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:42:53 +0200 (CEST)
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@giant.haxx.se
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Felix_Geisend=F6rfer?= <felix@transloadit.com>, Albert Lunde <atlunde@panix.com>, Kevin Swiber <kswiber@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <51712A49.6000901@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304191335410.3525@tvnag.unkk.fr>
References: <CADZbJ9dYFGyrceh03M3B0KdKto7160Dis_geh9um0BhVe1re0g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304182006001.21288@tvnag.unkk.fr> <29DE6A70-E3B9-4DCE-8C7E-506F6A0ADC92@gmail.com> <51706F32.5030108@panix.com> <5170E2A3.6010706@gmx.de> <CADZbJ9dGEVq-fQmhjRsddYdcg459r_zLfrOddkzHLOprZM0dNg@mail.gmail.com> <51712A49.6000901@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.67.6.50; envelope-from=daniel@haxx.se; helo=giant.haxx.se
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.766, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.702, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UT9ix-0007WX-1D dc10257647e1011727b7b0aedda26ab3
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Resumable Uploads
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/alpine.DEB.2.00.1304191335410.3525@tvnag.unkk.fr>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17360
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013, Julian Reschke wrote:

> "An origin server SHOULD reject any PUT request that contains a 
> Content-Range header field (Section 4.2 of [Part5]), since it might be 
> misinterpreted as partial content (or might be partial content that is being 
> mistakenly PUT as a full representation).

This explanation basically rules out PUT completely for upload resume, as even 
if this would instead be done with an imaginary new header called 
Partial-update-of-remote-thing-please:, it could also become subject of 
getting handled as a full representation by mistake.

And if PATCH is ruled out because how browser APIs, I guess only POST is left.

(I personally don't think limitations in existing APIs are a very good 
arguments though, as we're surely forced to update things - including APIs - 
to take advantage of this once we agree on how things should work.)

> If you believe that this is unreasonable, now and here are the right place 
> to discuss it.

My personal belief used to be that Content-Range was a suitable header for 
this purpose, back with the original RFC2616 wording. With the updated httpbis 
wording it is clear that Content-Range doesn't work for this.

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se