Re: Live Byte Ranges

"Poul-Henning Kamp" <> Mon, 28 November 2016 19:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E224129A81 for <>; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:57:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.398
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EBId2ZgUzlG7 for <>; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:57:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 974A51295F6 for <>; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:57:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1cBRza-0005Dr-Ki for; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:53:34 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:53:34 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <>
Received: from ([]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1cBRzP-0005AV-Pv for; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:53:23 +0000
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <>) id 1cBRzJ-0004Lv-Bb for; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:53:18 +0000
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D627A27378; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:52:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from (localhost []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id uASJqq96035075; Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:52:52 GMT (envelope-from
To: Patrick McManus <>
cc: HTTP Working Group <>
In-reply-to: <>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <>
References: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 19:52:52 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Received-SPF: none client-ip=;;
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.013, BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.899, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: 1cBRzJ-0004Lv-Bb e680dcfaf76a9c2dc7dc8e7702e09e9c
Subject: Re: Live Byte Ranges
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailing-List: <> archive/latest/33025
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>

In message <>
, Patrick McManus writes:

>To summarize briefly - this addresses the problem of addressing byte ranges
>of dynamic (growing) content. A number of solutions have seen false starts
>in this space previously, but this one has a shot at being compatible with
>existing infrastructure.

Varnish will almost certainly implement whatever comes out of this.

Notes from our mumblings in the project:

The "Very Large Value" solution it is brittle in more ways than is
desirable, but try as we may, we don't see any simpler/better ways
of doing it without negotiation/hints.

We suggest to either put a "Quite Large" lower limit on "Very Large
Value", or better yet:  Make it a magic value large enough to not
be a problem relative to actual Range requests.  If we keep with
the 9's motif from the draft, we suggest 999999999999999999 which
doesn't needlessly provoke 64-bit sign issues.

Typo on page 3: "accessable"

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.