Subject: Re: Call For Adoption Live Byte Ranges

From: Craig Pratt <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2017 15:00:51 -0800

On 12/19/16 2:30 PM, Patrick McManus wrote:
> Does anyone have any *additional* input on adopting this document? it 
> seems that there is strong support so far.
>
> We'll keep the our several CFAs open through the new year and then 
> make a determination. Thanks.
>
> -Patrick
>
Thanks Patrick,

In consideration of Poul-Henning Kamp's feedback and some evolution in 
my own preferences, I'm drafting a revision to the Live Bytes Range 
draft to define the "Very Large Value" as a specific numerical value - 
after realizing that 2^63 bytes doesn't really represent a practical limit.

e.g. At 50Mb/s, a representation limited to 2^63 bytes representation 
could cover over 46000 years. Even at 1Gb/s, 2339 years could be 
represented.

2^63 is 9223372036854775808 (decimal). I've defined a smaller value to 
avoid potential conflicts and to make the value more easily 
identifiable: 9222999999999999999.

I think having a clearly-defined Very Large Value such as this to 
represent the indeterminate end of content will be more 
deterministic/easily implemented than having a Server try to establish a 
VLV in each HTTP exchange. But I'd appreciate any thoughts prior to 
revising the draft.

Thanks much - and Happy New Year,

cp
-- 

craig pratt

Caspia Consulting

[email-masked]

503.746.8008