W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Delta Compression and UTF-8 Header Values

From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:18:53 -0600
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOiNObpVDu1TFdqFBfq=rqewLmme6pm-NUw2Ahhn0yfZkA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> --------
> In message <CAK3OfOi+cXMLGsMCpD1cRBxzz46wVYYj8nz021fhqhM7fTDMWA@mail.gmail.com>
> , Nico Williams writes:
>>> But how does the 2 ends agree on which encoding to use? It might be
>>> easier if HTTP just dictate UTF-8.
>>Not might be.  Will be.
> Really ?
> I have a hard time squaring that with the "HTTP/2 is just a transport
> protocol, we don't change the semantics" credo that was waved around
> rather forcefully previously ?

I'm talking about *header* data, not payloads.  HTTP/2.0 is just a
transport as far as the data goes, but there is metadata too.

> [1] We can probably do much more for transmission efficiency by killing
> cookies and adding client provided session-identifieres, than any
> kind of encoding or compression will ever be able to...[2]

Sort of.  Servers will still want to store state on the client side
(generally encrypted, thus not further compressible).  See

> [2] Not to mention the improved privacy and legal compliance that
> would automatically buy everybody...

Yes, see draft-williams-websec-session-continue-prob-00 (and -proto-00).

Received on Monday, 11 February 2013 00:19:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:10 UTC