IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Issue with "bytes" Range Unit and live streaming

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 12 May 2016 04:48 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 AB9AA12D151 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 21:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 JX3sRHV9XhNY for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 21:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
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 C607B12D0DD for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 11 May 2016 21:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1b0iSg-0003W0-9U for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:42:58 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 04:42:58 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1b0iSg-0003W0-9U@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1b0iSb-0003V3-PZ for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:42:53 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1b0iSZ-00062O-Ui for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:42:53 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (unknown [120.149.194.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9FA3222E25C; Thu, 12 May 2016 00:42:26 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <d01b15be-2df0-19af-1049-6d96250d5294@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 14:42:23 +1000
Cc: Craig Pratt <craig@ecaspia.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <099032CB-AD17-468F-83B3-D9C37C07C703@mnot.net>
References: <57102718.7010900@ecaspia.com> <0356EBBE092D394F9291DA01E8D28EC2021CEBE9AC@SEM001PD.sg.iaea.org> <5714A316.1080609@ecaspia.com> <9E953B010F1E974399030905C5DCB2E7183D2D4B@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <5715438F.4030100@ecaspia.com> <9E953B010F1E974399030905C5DCB2E7183D3011@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <57160081.9050307@ecaspia.com> <9E953B010F1E974399030905C5DCB2E7183D33A3@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <5716A8F8.6010208@ecaspia.com> <9E953B010F1E974399030905C5DCB2E7183D3DC4@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <5717C89C.1010601@ecaspia.com> <9E953B010F1E974399030905C5DCB2E7183D4070@ESESSMB101.ericsson.se> <CACweHNCFi_x5k6sZ0n3u3oNpa2rE7i-08fh9xtqfZFe4SfjSwA@mail.gmail.com> <5717EFB0.4050708@ecaspia.com> <5718466A.6010602@ecaspia.com> <0356EBBE092D394F9291DA01E8D28EC2022062FEF5@SEM002PD.sg.iaea.org> <7277CE69-0350-4AC2-81BB-61F911087E9D@cablelabs.com> <710FB0BE-8BD5-4F08-8BCC-A2C7F6CFE1E2@mnot.net> <CABkgnnU6nRBiVE9wXO4wgs1aL4QAo=g82U=3EN9fBsw93f_=3w@mail.gmail.com> <5733E820.60809@ecaspia.com> <d01b15be-2df0-19af-1049-6d96250d5294@gmx.de>
To: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.338, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1b0iSZ-00062O-Ui 55127da2f4cba2862794b66b00b1eaa8
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Issue with "bytes" Range Unit and live streaming
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/099032CB-AD17-468F-83B3-D9C37C07C703@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31641
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 12 May 2016, at 2:35 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> On 2016-05-12 04:19, Craig Pratt wrote:
>> On 5/11/16 6:40 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>>> On 12 May 2016 at 10:59, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>>>> 1. Changing the 'bytes' range-unit to allow this use case
>>>> 2. Minting a new range-unit
>>> I suggested a third option: work around the limitation.  Was there a
>>> reason that isn't feasible?  (There are probably many, but I saw none
>>> offered.)
>>> 
>> I'm definitely OK with a third option.
>> 
>> If no one thinks it's safe to define new Range Units, perhaps the
>> ...
> 
> FTR: I remain unconvinced that new we can't define new range units. Yes, intermediaries will not know hot to handle them (and thus must fall back to returning the full resource=), but that doesn't have to always be a problem, in particular with https.

We've seen evidence that some implementations have been hard-wired to assume "bytes." It's not clear how widespread this is.

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email