IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 12 May 2016 04:40 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 3CED312D5D6 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 21:40:32 -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 ZYQyod3I0nmq for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 May 2016 21:40:30 -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 91ED512D095 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 11 May 2016 21:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1b0iMD-0007xH-Jr for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:36:17 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 04:36:17 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1b0iMD-0007xH-Jr@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1b0iM5-0007wM-Sh for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:36:09 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1b0iM3-0007vB-OZ for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 12 May 2016 04:36:09 +0000
Received: from [10.43.5.254] ([178.210.117.58]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Mdrph-1bFN4w18cH-00PeJ8; Thu, 12 May 2016 06:35:39 +0200
To: Craig Pratt <craig@ecaspia.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
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>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <d01b15be-2df0-19af-1049-6d96250d5294@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 06:35:40 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5733E820.60809@ecaspia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:mwhBl+mFEUPxXAPhp5wFMy4JJe1KBQcmnySt34XvtuoTYsr/Pu9 kgJe9Z1yFNdjCEur1zJwAYpHi1ahWdootsxHOQgCoagg//q8kkh40iUQ5HDI/N5wTEsXCpH 8oeQT3+5z8ydt081OFvZOQf/05n3AWOuUTyt0U3jbSR6CNj9rwZ74dxYxVB0dMpP7S92CaM I/8gxC+FdLupDkpOr3nXQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:F7RFbYi8CXc=:lB25KDK0hA08D4BNrSFBcY 0faIItUB6AyEbpkDCkW46J1hkSKFI1SAc0/HJFLujdXuA0RTd6D+nL6XW51ZB7suweio1FsLz YQeTft72qmH4ONG4F2lMRaM56sNqPcrqee0CZBDtCUCuqcho8DOgMSK1dellMu13WGLAB62c7 Nry3Wc0GcDi0P4SVrvvXq5KPEkfa6OKRMbaRQ8vEROOD8TpHvLo3F8HzlmjQagpkFSiEIDkbf Nz8ABOi6sPqvHWnZLpobfDCF3SWK+633kqfyri0PxSeuzOy13+VKaOUbyMRsJl2XUl1gbcZma QMSicn4I/4IUyLEDqbSY4YdD08OcI0VCs1hA7KXMLQqwbRy8o5KJP5zRicpfew2AmoT4RfgnR CRYy1CG8xuc5V7DttahFAy9bcYqnMW1hLasWfu7SjZFD1dZAafyzEIN25RbWXBUBiRoWI8FnJ K0qoTVISwZ+3tKCsW4mxrLhsxJC3EueiO94MsaDTv0goybKyKCBd1wjVRZeIzWIVhMi71JJhr KmgscRSqX8xYwTeN+QE5JAjjUCJyHigt1hzQES0OBlYaxILynNmfOkAVSLOOTWawUIeJJN2ze +mKL42xI++UhmwikoQu29vHPJfk82gOJaVH79KcX1dK1YttuwhrDW0gA472Lo98cfJl6qu117 YzLF9NyDt9FEMjcGQPgEuymjONEDjY824JReuePPnTITkKlcbEibdiHeGC5+XiL0GI+d+zBUL yFp8vYZFwdT0LysLx9tFuWyMnQb7g+H3swP8bk1pfIOltPmLv5A+F2ec1B3Gsf2YJr+Nvf4Q1 5HDm3lq
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.17.20; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1b0iM3-0007vB-OZ 93d81ff0e6ce857bbeea23d40990a75e
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/d01b15be-2df0-19af-1049-6d96250d5294@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31640
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 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.

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email