Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed a couple references to "Very Large values" lower case and "^^" to "^" #573

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 10, 2018

Conversation

craigpratt
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Also changed exponent notation from "^^" to "^"
@craigpratt craigpratt self-assigned this Apr 9, 2018
Copy link
Contributor

@martinthomson martinthomson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

Do you think that you want to provide some guidance about choice? That is, that the client chooses this value based on it being more than they are expecting to be present on the resource, or at least enough that making another range request isn't going to be onerous. And that that is balanced against the risk of too large values causing problems like integer overflow on the server side.

@craigpratt
Copy link
Contributor Author

@martinthomson

Thanks Martin,

Do you think some of the language from Section 5 needs to be mentioned/reiterated earlier?

Guess I could say something like "a value much larger than the expected maximum size of the representation should be provided by the client (see section 5 for security considerations)"?

Here's most of Section 5

...in applications where there's no expectation that the representation will ever exceed 2^63, a value smaller than this value should be used as the very large last-byte-pos in a byte-seek request or content-range response. Also, some implementations (e.g. JavaScript-based clients and servers) are not able to represent all values beyond 2^53. So similarly, if there's no expectation that a representation will ever exceed 2^53 bytes, values smaller than this limit should be used for the last-byte-pos in byte-range requests.

@martinthomson
Copy link
Contributor

That would be perfect. Note that the security considerations here are more "compatibility considerations" than anything else.

@craigpratt craigpratt merged commit 2471034 into master Apr 10, 2018
@craigpratt craigpratt deleted the cpratt/fix-very-large-refs branch April 10, 2018 07:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants