range/streaming of incomplete objects
guillaume at varnish-software.com
Sun Nov 27 20:35:01 CET 2016
Typo on page 3: "accessable"
Did I miss something or is the "Very Large Value" definition a bit fuzzy?
Overall, I'd prefer have the client use an open ended range, possibly
adding a header to say that it refuse/accept/requires aggregation.
And the server answer would just send 200, 416 or 206 + CL (no aggregation)
or 206 + chunked (aggregation). For HEAD requests, allow content range to
answer "1000-*/*" to say it allows an open-ended range starting at byte
Am I oversimplifying here?
On Nov 23, 2016 11:40, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk at phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> This IETF draft is interesting:
> The HTTPbis WG is looking for "go/nogo" input if this is something
> which should be adopted.
> Input welcome
> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
> varnish-dev mailing list
> varnish-dev at varnish-cache.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the varnish-dev