#460 [was: Transfer-codings, mandatory content-coding support and intermediaries] from Mark Nottingham on 2014-04-22 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from April to June 2014)

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:52:58 +1000
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <22D94BD0-23DB-430A-BD62-8ACE7F4F6479@mnot.net>

<https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/460>

Folks,

This isn't a voting exercise. If you want to keep the implicit CE gzip, please address the problems called out in the issue.

Thanks,


On 22 Apr 2014, at 8:34 am, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org> wrote:

> +1
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 8:10 AM, <K.Morgan@iaea.org> wrote:
>  how would you propose to deal with the problem you mentioned above? and the importance of compression?
> 
> 
> I support keeping the implicit CE gzip and not doing anything regarding TE or hop-to-hop encodings for reasons discussed previously. 

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2014 07:53:32 UTC