Re: Resumable Uploads

Felix Geisendörfer <felix@transloadit.com> Mon, 22 April 2013 16:13 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A6111E80D1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:13:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.676
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.676 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z9JlWNwkbhUb for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6487711E80C5 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:13:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UUJKS-00081Q-O7 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:10:56 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:10:56 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UUJKS-00081Q-O7@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <felix.geisendoerfer@transloadit.com>) id 1UUJKJ-0007yV-SW for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:10:47 +0000
Received: from mail-ve0-f182.google.com ([209.85.128.182]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <felix.geisendoerfer@transloadit.com>) id 1UUJKE-0003zw-Ni for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:10:47 +0000
Received: by mail-ve0-f182.google.com with SMTP id da11so662180veb.27 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=GGF38AZiYqNHbMDA+thEbxJS5A7Ee59GXz3BDO4ThEE=; b=IbKbETVNlL5bUskGEhangjPLys7JD2aoW5JRMEA8KS+W1aeqSvQx3RtxDUO96n0e9u LaLuxSSVFIyxM6WHJDzpyVg3lZGgcsOE5XevPCOla9sngUkb4bX552ojJnRfNLovWN4Z SBeSVSrRLPj0/SgDGme5qhfCBxL3v0BxcW1dMeWWUsNV0PDlmLdy/hjqn8rFOCXxPTKX xW56t3U02JJyLlGBNRcLpQ1TVhx/Kp5KQFA9CqvvoQgUJMTChyuWQyl+V9Nk6XQ8Cinr eWUGA3jo2OJm+77via4TgwninqcXqxFJ5Ad2L1DoWh9Zb4eY7pN79vcmzAST6JQGyMLJ 3QCg==
X-Received: by 10.220.168.2 with SMTP id s2mr19517830vcy.6.1366647015805; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: felix.geisendoerfer@transloadit.com
Received: by 10.58.15.165 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:09:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [31.172.178.246]
In-Reply-To: <51751244.1090800@gmx.de>
References: <CADZbJ9dYFGyrceh03M3B0KdKto7160Dis_geh9um0BhVe1re0g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304182006001.21288@tvnag.unkk.fr> <29DE6A70-E3B9-4DCE-8C7E-506F6A0ADC92@gmail.com> <51706F32.5030108@panix.com> <5170E2A3.6010706@gmx.de> <CADZbJ9dGEVq-fQmhjRsddYdcg459r_zLfrOddkzHLOprZM0dNg@mail.gmail.com> <51712A49.6000901@gmx.de> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304191335410.3525@tvnag.unkk.fr> <CADZbJ9d_9wirsYPt=1frY5UiaOnaaB1v=hGMuPR2e5yXV6m+NA@mail.gmail.com> <B641DA23-25B2-486F-BDED-4E671ABAFEFC@tzi.org> <CADZbJ9fhvqg_a5V5iRpe3LO0L0RXdxT2pSNTqwLQEqOK0YUa=Q@mail.gmail.com> <51751244.1090800@gmx.de>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Felix_Geisend=F6rfer?= <felix@transloadit.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 18:09:55 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: g9IhxG8wLG9pZDRIRSBZ-WMmzk0
Message-ID: <CADZbJ9fsJFkhpCHQ5QatFVTBRM5uyNb-vJRjJ3op73u-Dksc3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c18aa4e957cd04daf54de5
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkTPlSNZOsp+aYPa+7o7zq5gH0ECwmxoDCme3O5kSM2e35hp0COUO2yo5nZRZ8FohEkRYK3
Received-SPF: none client-ip=209.85.128.182; envelope-from=felix.geisendoerfer@transloadit.com; helo=mail-ve0-f182.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UUJKE-0003zw-Ni 15995f933d9b7ea19bac7c7e2499daac
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Resumable Uploads
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CADZbJ9fsJFkhpCHQ5QatFVTBRM5uyNb-vJRjJ3op73u-Dksc3A@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17470
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 Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote;wrote:

> But you *can* send multipart body from Javascript, right?
>

Yes. It's an option, but I think multipart would add a lot of complexity if
all we need is a way to indicate an offset argument.

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

> >  XHR2 send interface
> Well, that probably should be fiaxed to allow an array of things, and not
> a single thing, where the things are then concatenated on the wire.
>

I agree. But that will take time.


> But until then:
> Put the offset:
>
> -- in the URI:
>    PATCH /foo?at=0020 HTTP/1.1
> -- in the Content-Type:
>    Content-Type: application/byteslice; at=0020
>

Thanks for the suggestions. The querystring might be the best option for
something the web can use today.

That being said, I'd still like to see http provide built-in primitives for
resume operations in the future and make sure whatever userland protocol we
end up defining has these upcoming mechanisms in mind / includes a clear
upgrade path.

So if my concerns for portability were lifted, it seems that defining a
PATCH format would be the best solution? Would this list still be the right
place for carrying on this discussion, or would this be a separate RFC?

Cheers,
--
Felix Geisendörfer (felixge.de)
Co-Founder, Transloadit (transloadit.com)