Hi Wendy, All,
W dniu 2015-06-02 o 17:05, Wendy Roome pisze:
The only problem with your suggestion is that it does not allow GET-mode
requests. A client can still get a full map, it just has to do a POST
request instead. In the past, some folks have thought that was limiting,
because proxies do not cache POST requests.
Fortunately I am not one of those people. So unless someone objects
vigorously, I like your approach.
That's the price of nice services - you cannot cache them. And you
shouldn't cache a lot of non-standard ALTO responses if you do not know
client capabilities. Contrary, in a closed deployment (when you know
CAPA of server and clients), you can always deploy intelligent caches
that can store replies to POSTs.
Thus, +1 for "non-cacheability is not an issue".
But I suggest we expand it into an omitted-value compression option for
any cost map, rather than a marker for a strict-metric cost. Specifically,
suppose we define a map-compression extension that can reduce the size of
*any* cost map.
+1. I like it. It's seems to be generic, simple, and easy to understand.
Best regards,
Piotr 'GhosT' Wydrych
--
Piotr 'GhosT' Wydrych .. xmpp:wydrych//agh.edu.pl .. http://wydrych.net/
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
