Re: Call For Adoption Live Byte Ranges

Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com> Mon, 20 February 2017 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 1FB241297BD for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:21:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.401
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sendgrid.me
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GmMc4xXjPcLH for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:21:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6528F12940D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:21:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cfuQN-0001O3-P1 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 20:19:07 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 20:19:07 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cfuQN-0001O3-P1@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <bounces+1568871-208f-ietf-http-wg=w3.org@sendgrid.net>) id 1cfuQH-0001Mx-CG for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 20:19:01 +0000
Received: from o1678950229.outbound-mail.sendgrid.net ([167.89.50.229]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <bounces+1568871-208f-ietf-http-wg=w3.org@sendgrid.net>) id 1cfuQ9-0000Fv-S1 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 20:18:55 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sendgrid.me; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:subject:to:cc:content-type; s=smtpapi; bh=J5hYCaA7U0vAcIwyXfjwPJrmHyI=; b=M0VkqgrjDxoJ/wMO4R Va2wRLd1+Sc/7u704OMFAq1wRJnwt2Qmj968X9dzjnYVRQcyBuGFXDsBEhjivz2K h/8/wTaTgXhB6arfrWlwxgbP9gBfuRGKC4Wbd4PDDi32KQahngrdi3dGNXDS+2d3 qjU6G9Mym0GA3BNU6UgkPNHDs=
Received: by filter0246p1las1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0246p1las1-9240-58AB4F06-75 2017-02-20 20:18:14.903853901 +0000 UTC
Received: from mail-qk0-f181.google.com (mail-qk0-f181.google.com [209.85.220.181]) by ismtpd0005p1iad1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id PooS4mQqTberBiZMrG5rsQ for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 20:18:14.744 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qk0-f181.google.com with SMTP id x71so39165218qkb.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:18:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lVS5YCXbQidLAXRmOR3EIEy3s6ffIi/BrKTsMonlk6AQrEn/Q7i+GKAUUq8hCcQKq9q1bQ9vFaiNY2ag==
X-Received: by 10.55.220.131 with SMTP id v125mr24629512qki.93.1487621894057; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:18:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.162.65 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:18:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <41667b41-2c00-98e5-628f-44531249559c@ecaspia.com>
References: <CAOdDvNpnzxqPaQ1KMAKwQn3XRpHgtA-71DiLHJQ+HD8ve-4Lkg@mail.gmail.com> <41667b41-2c00-98e5-628f-44531249559c@ecaspia.com>
From: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 15:18:13 -0500
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAOdDvNoeX7zYixhwprJpx7OzjPWh1L-7Nd=Dvm5L5FBXVUmG5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNoeX7zYixhwprJpx7OzjPWh1L-7Nd=Dvm5L5FBXVUmG5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Craig Pratt <craig@ecaspia.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0cc5168e6a760548fbf6d8"
X-SG-EID: YLWet4rakcOTMHWvPPwWbcsiUJbN1FCn0PHYd/Uujh4wosBnISOCYTwCIoI20VkfrQFbfQH+EqbWyn iJGTgYuidj2e2s8vDIdbGbsD0MDS11E5JX413xbQZemLyssTQdIVQpf3mAoZii5+pnloLWbnFhbDnL IgeelUbmC+ItVI/QsxU13Z7Sb0+VuEbsGMUt4lHatIPyfT3jKjWKfLTf7G64ljyTI0mKuPptm4AV0u I=
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=167.89.50.229; envelope-from=bounces+1568871-208f-ietf-http-wg=w3.org@sendgrid.net; helo=o1678950229.outbound-mail.sendgrid.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.894, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1cfuQ9-0000Fv-S1 399e4e32c590e998788262ce5274c325
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call For Adoption Live Byte Ranges
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAOdDvNoeX7zYixhwprJpx7OzjPWh1L-7Nd=Dvm5L5FBXVUmG5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33587
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>

Craig - sorry again for the schedule on this one. We certainly have
consensus for adoption. Please upload an ietf-httpbis copy to the
datatracker when you're ready (it can be the same as your current revision
if you like).

Our WG drafts are normally managed through github at
https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions - contact Mark or I out of band
and we'll help with the administration of the repo for whomever would like
to have primary responsibility for the document - or if you'd rather skip
that you can send us the markdown and we'll take care of it for you.

I think the primary remaining concern of the chairs is that the draft get a
thorough review from header field experts in our community.

-Patrick


On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Craig Pratt <craig@ecaspia.com> wrote:

> On 12/19/16 2:30 PM, Patrick McManus wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have any *additional* input on adopting this document? it
>> seems that there is strong support so far.
>>
>> We'll keep the our several CFAs open through the new year and then make a
>> determination. Thanks.
>>
>> -Patrick
>>
>> Thanks Patrick,
>
> In consideration of Poul-Henning Kamp's feedback and some evolution in my
> own preferences, I'm drafting a revision to the Live Bytes Range draft to
> define the "Very Large Value" as a specific numerical value - after
> realizing that 2^63 bytes doesn't really represent a practical limit.
>
> e.g. At 50Mb/s, a representation limited to 2^63 bytes representation
> could cover over 46000 years. Even at 1Gb/s, 2339 years could be
> represented.
>
> 2^63 is 9223372036854775808 (decimal). I've defined a smaller value to
> avoid potential conflicts and to make the value more easily identifiable:
> 9222999999999999999.
>
> I think having a clearly-defined Very Large Value such as this to
> represent the indeterminate end of content will be more
> deterministic/easily implemented than having a Server try to establish a
> VLV in each HTTP exchange. But I'd appreciate any thoughts prior to
> revising the draft.
>
> Thanks much - and Happy New Year,
>
> cp
> --
>
> craig pratt
>
> Caspia Consulting
>
> craig@ecaspia.com
>
> 503.746.8008
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>