On 04/16/2012 03:31 PM, Geert Jansen wrote:
On 04/16/2012 01:03 PM, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
So (unless someone objects) let's go for option #2 (using the Prefer
header on each and every request, and release the session once it is
not there).
My only objection is that you implement a draft spec and implement a
header without even bothering to register it - or asking if there is
such an identical-purposed header with a different name which may get
registered / is already in use somewhere.
This is somewhat of a red herring though.
HTTP Prefer was created exactly for the purpose of indicating a
preference for a certain behavior of response. Have a look at section
9.1.1 of the draft RFC for the initial preferences and you'll see the
preferences that are already registered.
HTTP Prefer also defines a registration process for the possible
values of this header. The process requires an email to
[email protected] with a 14 day response time.
The alternative to HTTP Prefer would be creating a new header (as i am
not aware of any other /approved/ header that fits the bill). This
requires writing an RFC and get it approved, which would take much
longer, and which would likely get the comment of "Why aren't you
using Prefer".
I'm more worried about "persistent-auth" than 'prefer'. We could always
contact the draft author ([email protected]) and ask for his opinion.
Y.
Even if HTTP Prefer, for whatever reason, unexpectedly does not become
a standard, i think in practice this does not impact us in any way.
Regards
Geert
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
