>>>>> On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 09:13:44 +1000, Greg Wilkins <gregw_at_webtide.com> said:
GW> However, I think we could say something about how RFC7239 should be
GW> supported. In fact we could even provide methods to help decode those
GW> headers.
>>>>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:19:22 -0700, Wenbo Zhu <wenboz_at_google.com> said:
WZ> How widely has this been adopted, do you know?
>>>>> On Wed, 14 Sep 2016 11:07:19 +1000, Greg Wilkins <gregw_at_webtide.com> said:
GW> I think it is now widely supported by servers, but it is not yet widely
GW> deployed.
GW> As the spec is rather straight forward, I see no reason for it not
GW> to slowly increase its penetration as proxies and load balancers are
GW> updated. Also any support we put in the spec could have support
GW> under the covers for the defacto standard headers and container
GW> enhancements.
Can someone please give us the TLDR on RFC7239?
How about a sketch of what methods we would like to see?
Ed
--
| edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017