Your link doesn't say URIs are length-limited

I'm guessing you never hit this issue then, but it's a real issue. Whether or not it's in the RFC as a hard limit it doesn't matter, no HTTP server will allow unlimited sized URIs.

You simply can't base64 large payloads and you're stuck with workarounds.

▲

cryptonym 5 hours ago | parent [-]

You are guessing wrong. Thanks, I know specific implementation will come with their limits. This will equally apply to QUERY body size and caching strategy.

Are we seriously ok with linking the RFC as source while providing a statement that doesn't match? RFC does matter.

	▲	ralferoo 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The RFC does say "It is RECOMMENDED that all senders and recipients support, at a minimum, URIs with lengths of 8000 octets in protocol elements." One can infer from the RFC that you can reasonably expect many implementations to fail beyond 8000 characters, and that there are no guarantees up to that either. True, the RFC doesn't specify a limit, but it does clearly indicate that it's not unbounded, nor should you expect it to be.