Re: Early Hints (103)

Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk> Thu, 24 November 2016 17:09 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 6E12B129BDA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:09:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lukasa-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 2lBxujKJTYEA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:09:31 -0800 (PST)
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 0B473129A36 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:09:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c9xT8-00036z-Id for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 17:05:54 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 17:05:54 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c9xT8-00036z-Id@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <cory@lukasa.co.uk>) id 1c9xT1-0002z0-9o for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 17:05:47 +0000
Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <cory@lukasa.co.uk>) id 1c9xSv-0007Oq-9j for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 17:05:42 +0000
Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id t79so67816452wmt.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:05:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lukasa-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=5kAiWGORJ1tc+deCOjP1inq5CSCiTTwBc838RsCR48o=; b=hW9HzH+mfFjgt3Odx0AEwHIwWvknxBoe1HK4x916TF9TteUdeICTafRTdQPcnyHfy9 pzWa6kW8zL7YL6mE8yGUpdF75XcRiKohm+fk+w0Q0jGTLylga1HnBEU8+Oz9FU/uIsS8 AeD3jR76HIHoQvIH/NwbtEQYinEpAA5RMkDOpzE19Ul5zGbf9I0d5MhuY7F2auplBTXE iE8LTcNNJ2o72/5lRjT/thKkPEQr7nz5RgI7vtaMZk30faPrQ4BSRmmCLyhaJqQEEBTk WCWB5kezIVM48NAAGQtAd+mkWIKpftvUH2MiPsUGID1EvKGZqEWMvgR1H9oGQ7NwlIyN 9TrA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=5kAiWGORJ1tc+deCOjP1inq5CSCiTTwBc838RsCR48o=; b=jnc8pf+oAEntcHuTHvIXkWiEcUFXUi0ERYuft6YioKUg2gYO6E7gnuAjFyjMaKj/n5 o3gD2YPWfoHEGGXUv8Df66a0uMW+LNzVcMLxY8ZyJSCXfRXSWFrW1yPheF8SP7j/4foL cdAqq1BII6hswiRAl268LNvJL8rih7YRq2kYgwu1q/E1qkL/bqE5EtIHbZloIKaibsh+ Y4Nfunf2ktR6xw4nlrfUhbze+TBBBFVoRhq8C3lx5pRwCGqvj/1Ot1Yuf1keTNHafw8B LnEl24C0qoleImdjWz/yhTxXA6adVMrQTZtkqSSCceDVr7koliFm0z6OWaohC04ZIPe6 sOYg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC02jqn32vigycoskIo5o8BUY/JFBaCvrjSWVsE6ec8H+TRuCtKNUS/KDTAtRogT8Aw==
X-Received: by 10.28.94.205 with SMTP id s196mr3192875wmb.1.1480007114031; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:05:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (72.6.208.46.dyn.plus.net. [46.208.6.72]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w8sm9125578wmw.4.2016.11.24.09.05.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:05:13 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3256\))
From: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <CAOdDvNos+qXxi8K3HPtkuzkAuc1ctAmdt=Oz+vJy+oBgB7skQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 17:05:10 +0000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5079650B-9BF2-430F-9244-D54A1FC6D244@lukasa.co.uk>
References: <CAOdDvNos+qXxi8K3HPtkuzkAuc1ctAmdt=Oz+vJy+oBgB7skQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3256)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=74.125.82.43; envelope-from=cory@lukasa.co.uk; helo=mail-wm0-f43.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.092, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1c9xSv-0007Oq-9j c373f48944e3857b5062b9ca3d607e8c
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Early Hints (103)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/5079650B-9BF2-430F-9244-D54A1FC6D244@lukasa.co.uk>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32997
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 22 Nov 2016, at 22:26, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com> wrote:
> 
> However, the draft was published pretty close to meeting time and there wasn't much space for discussion in the room. So before we do a Call For Adoption, I would like to hear some more discussion so the chairs can be confident there is interest - even if that discussion is "I would like to implement that" or "what does that accomplish?". Please do chime in, your silence will be taken for disinterest otherwise :).

I have no immediate intent to implement, but this is only due to limitations or constraints on the clients and servers I work on. I doubt any of my clients will implement Link header following directly because it’s of limited utility in programmatic clients. However, I intend for all my clients to tolerate such headers. On the server side the server I work on most right now has no support for returning headers before body computation, but I will investigate whether there is interest in providing such support. If there is, I will implement 103.

At a higher level, I’m +1 on this idea: I think it’s a good solution that uses established protocol tools to solve a very real problem.

Cory