Re: Is HTTP/1.0 still relevant?

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Fri, 04 September 2020 09:09 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 2787A3A118D for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 02:09:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 5cWtfzsr3sqt for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 02:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15AB93A1164 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 02:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1kE7iO-0000W6-N8 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2020 09:09:00 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2020 09:09:00 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1kE7iO-0000W6-N8@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <daniel@haxx.se>) id 1kE7iN-0000VL-4X for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2020 09:08:59 +0000
Received: from www.haxx.se ([2a00:1a28:1200:9::2] helo=giant.haxx.se) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <daniel@haxx.se>) id 1kE7iL-0000EC-Jw for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2020 09:08:58 +0000
Received: from giant.haxx.se (mail [127.0.0.1]) by giant.haxx.se (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-4) with ESMTPS id 08498Osn018520 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 4 Sep 2020 11:08:24 +0200
Received: from localhost (dast@localhost) by giant.haxx.se (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id 08498O7e018516; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 11:08:24 +0200
X-Authentication-Warning: giant.haxx.se: dast owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 11:08:24 +0200 (CEST)
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@giant.haxx.se
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
cc: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, Eric J Bowman <mellowmutt@zoho.com>, Ietf Http Wg <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <20200904090527.GI2905@1wt.eu>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2009041106200.15806@tvnag.unkk.fr>
References: <174578870d7.1265f983c12789.7350275676057542310@zoho.com> <20200904054051.GA2905@1wt.eu> <17457f2cfaa.b1c12efb13715.7081201094742751967@zoho.com> <13FF9481-ADFB-4006-A237-9CA795507C5B@greenbytes.de> <20200904082136.GC2905@1wt.eu> <alpine.DEB.2.20.2009041059380.15806@tvnag.unkk.fr> <20200904090527.GI2905@1wt.eu>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
Received-SPF: none client-ip=2a00:1a28:1200:9::2; envelope-from=daniel@haxx.se; helo=giant.haxx.se
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1kE7iL-0000EC-Jw 8687167ac601b0095ddd5dcdf53e99f0
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Is HTTP/1.0 still relevant?
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/alpine.DEB.2.20.2009041106200.15806@tvnag.unkk.fr>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/38011
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: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Fri, 4 Sep 2020, Willy Tarreau wrote:

>>  - server then gives Content-Length: in response
>
> They're lucky because it could perfectly just deliver the data and close!

Yes absolutely. And it somewhat puzzling to a client-oriented mind like mine 
that there are servers that opt to go chunked even though they apparently have 
the size ...

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se