The specification is not explicit as to whether clients must use either both or neither of start=… and end=… query parameters, or if just one of them may also be used. If it is permissible to use start=… by itself or end=… by itself, the specification is not explicit about what that should mean.
The specification does not specify what should happen when a request contains an end query parameter larger than the total sequence length. Reasonable behaviours could be to return a sub-sequence from start to the end of the sequence (i.e., “clipping” the end value) or to fail with Bad Request (as the requested end is out of bounds).
Note that the specification does say that out of bounds Range requests must fail with Bad Request. However this is inconsistent with RFC 7233, which specifies that out of bounds last‑byte‑pos is to be clipped while out of bounds first‑byte‑pos is unsatisfiable so should fail.
The specification is not explicit as to whether clients must use either both or neither of
start=…andend=…query parameters, or if just one of them may also be used. If it is permissible to usestart=…by itself orend=…by itself, the specification is not explicit about what that should mean.The specification does not specify what should happen when a request contains an
endquery parameter larger than the total sequence length. Reasonable behaviours could be to return a sub-sequence fromstartto the end of the sequence (i.e., “clipping” theendvalue) or to fail withBad Request(as the requestedendis out of bounds).Note that the specification does say that out of bounds Range requests must fail with
Bad Request. However this is inconsistent with RFC 7233, which specifies that out of boundslast‑byte‑posis to be clipped while out of boundsfirst‑byte‑posis unsatisfiable so should fail.