W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: Making Implicit C-E work.

From: Roland Zink <roland@zinks.de>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:29:42 +0200
Message-ID: <5360B476.3030609@zinks.de>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 29.04.2014 23:33, Roberto Peon wrote:
> For better or worse, C-E is what is deployed today. Many of my 
> customers will not be writing custom servers, and as such to be 
> deployable, we need solutions that will work with what is out there.
> Otherwise, the feature is effectively only of theoretical use for the 
> majority of customers.
You need at least new HTTP2 servers. Those servers probably could do 
gzip on the transport level.

> I don't dispute that one could use T-E over HTTP/2 for this, assuming 
> that it was end-to-end (which, unfortunately, it will not be for quite 
> some time).
> -=R
Not sure if it really needs to be end to end. If support for T-E is 
mandated in HTTP2 then proxies can just forward the compressed content 
unmodified within HTTP2 if they don't have a need to modify the content 
much the same way as they would do with C-E.

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 08:30:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:30 UTC