Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call)
David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> Wed, 02 July 2014 05:59 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6831B28D0 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 22:59:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.883
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.883 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.77, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 4Gdai1OV3ZfR for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 22:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B79871B28D1 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 22:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1X2DYx-0005oB-9j for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 05:58:35 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 05:58:35 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1X2DYx-0005oB-9j@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <potswa@gmail.com>) id 1X2DYp-0005nM-QJ for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 05:58:27 +0000
Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com ([209.85.192.181]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <potswa@gmail.com>) id 1X2DYp-0005wr-6P for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 05:58:27 +0000
Received: by mail-pd0-f181.google.com with SMTP id v10so11354390pde.12 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 22:58:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=z4OJlEnqPg4P/3gUTSqNWWZ2YMYcSrr68IIU4ChB9h8=; b=gpO8VweYbbuvjl4nCmd003hBHaSYy5Y5sx8nmpttZNnSsXDgAiG5Gc6SO2gS74TOhp GjHz5o+ekVIFQkSqRW0n4i8J58tmosB3jQSwKjgQ/WcR0Yqee4SY0O2kr8VJN1x1QFaY 8IIgsp+Qxqk91m+pK475ZIUWavdZnyvUV8eiYv41DYDxMAFiErTABDzGzAWkqy5/TTQY vxSJhsEDo7kE7hSCLxKT8EGBWwSv2+nzYKcDwwM6x8dn9dXpL4hrC/thVoRsNCG1scm3 JvpDAuEapeTeldvrIcNO4aqDNqTFQpG3M9Z2V4IrvUDMIoF5QebegTcKc6aTk6MiFBoW ZeXQ==
X-Received: by 10.68.181.165 with SMTP id dx5mr68583075pbc.38.1404280681130; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 22:58:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.20.10.2] ([121.54.54.146]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qf10sm35403839pbc.23.2014.07.01.22.57.57 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Jul 2014 22:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <0916C49C-C537-4977-A209-2923E3BC4FAA@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 13:57:48 +0800
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3137FC1B-6427-48A8-86C8-83E773ADB679@gmail.com>
References: <0356EBBE092D394F9291DA01E8D28EC20100F4E9FA@sem002pd.sg.iaea.org> <CA+pLO_iP2NOOagH+Bxz9294EFCqecuKfFG2mPyeb1==yHJrH6Q@mail.gmail.com> <53A06B6F.5010102@fb.com> <CABihn6F4XAFOgX8yiDdgRHJVqvFwmV7XApAirA0AnJ7o4+pmRQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXv3FeOoJoH_r-Sf1ZUDkNpFyU3YAzm2w2mwVe18+bemA@mail.gmail.com> <CABihn6Ho9H-h7uzPRzuds8Ty3nWcmnrDoJYc9m9XDcLt471r9w@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnX+9PF_4W0PdgdWACBcxi2szkoH_aXp0skoY+7_yCfZJg@mail.gmail.com> <CABihn6G-F=Bt+=3A41OQ90OHUnCc36OQB11io8vCw=_H8bUzng@mail.gmail.com> <53B19396.2090700@fb.com> <575C6C71-E344-42FF-A157-8E35C2222C0A@gmail.com> <CABkgnnUsCS3P0ZR-vDyeTzTu2nRKF06cLybvgQbisAWiRqo+8w@mail.gmail.com> <4612290A-C401-4CA9-A55F-96B7EC2EC7D8@gmail.com> <CABkgnnWK5+B8v5ZFBCcZNd0B4zKfT=3h_8_cKYvAcbsbtbhzww@mail.gmail.com> <21E9E3FC-A8CA-41AF-82A8-F8BBC1CB71F8@gmail.com> <CABkgnnUmS+DS1-TMzn1yHWSHiM4dqhgTNYsT4RoZv8_=+_2_6Q@mail.gmail.com> <0916C49C-C537-4977-A209-2923E3BC4FAA@mnot.net>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.192.181; envelope-from=potswa@gmail.com; helo=mail-pd0-f181.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.779, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.614, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1X2DYp-0005wr-6P 0a25a2152223107deb37655a7f90f414
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/3137FC1B-6427-48A8-86C8-83E773ADB679@gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/25033
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 2014–07–02, at 1:02 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > It sounds like we're leaning towards removing it - can people live with that? As I noted in the other thread and on GitHub, segments are redundant with midstream headers. Both require data not to be coalesced across a boundary, and weakly suggest that intermediaries should flush. Neither work over HTTP/1.1. I have no complaint about removal, but “deprecation in favor” might be better terminology.
- END_SEGMENT? K.Morgan
- Re: END_SEGMENT? Jeff Pinner
- Re: END_SEGMENT? K.Morgan
- Re: END_SEGMENT? Amos Jeffries
- Re: END_SEGMENT? Matthew Kerwin
- Re: END_SEGMENT? Mark Nottingham
- Re: END_SEGMENT? Roy T. Fielding
- Re: END_SEGMENT? Roberto Peon
- Re: END_SEGMENT? David Krauss
- Re: END_SEGMENT? Jeff Pinner
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Daniel Sommermann
- RE: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Mike Bishop
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Daniel Sommermann
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Yutaka Hirano
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Yutaka Hirano
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Daniel Sommermann
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Jeff Pinner
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Jeff Pinner
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Daniel Sommermann
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Jeff Pinner
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Yutaka Hirano
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Daniel Sommermann
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) David Krauss
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) David Krauss
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#537) Daniel Sommermann
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) David Krauss
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) David Krauss
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Yutaka Hirano
- Re: END_SEGMENT? (#397) Martin Thomson
- #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Mark Nottingham
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Yutaka Hirano
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) David Krauss
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Roberto Peon
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) David Krauss
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Roberto Peon
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Roberto Peon
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Greg Wilkins
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Mike Bishop
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Mark Nottingham
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Martin Thomson
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Nicholas Hurley
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Martin Thomson
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) David Krauss
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Martin Thomson
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Greg Wilkins
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Martin Thomson
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Greg Wilkins
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Yutaka Hirano
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Roberto Peon
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Erik Nygren
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Martin Thomson
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Greg Wilkins
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Mark Nottingham
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Yutaka Hirano
- Re: #537: Remove segments (consensus call) Martin Thomson