- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 23:09:08 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: hallam@etna.ai.mit.edu
- Cc: jg@zorch.w3.org, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
hallam@Etna.ai.mit.edu: >[...] however the question which I was raising was whether >compressing the body of the message was more relevant than >compressing the headers. Here is a version of the answer: - sticky headers: 1-4% traffic savings - compressing text/html and text/plain entities in relayed responses: 20-45% traffic savings Now, why is there so much fuss over sticky headers? Ever since Accept headers dropped below 1.4K, they are a solution in search of a problem. If this group were to produce a sticky header spec, the spec would only distract vendors from implementing optimizations which are actually worth the effort. Koen.
Received on Monday, 12 August 1996 14:13:09 UTC