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

Re: intermediaries, implicit gzip, etags, no-transform

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 12:19:46 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbekY52E_T1kkF11T_gtHnB2UUeFb7h5JkA0T4tFBfPxVg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
One would think that, by now, the benefits of actually following the
specs would be well understood. Not changing the Etag when applying
content-coding has a very real impact; as does not following proper
cache-control requirements. (and yes, sadly, google is the only one
with this problem).

On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 2014-06-20 19:04, Martin Thomson wrote:
>>
>> On 20 June 2014 08:12, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> - setting "cache-control: no-transform" on the response, does not change
>>> this behavior, thus both seem to violate a "MUST NOT" requirement from
>>> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc7230.html#rfc.section.5.7.2>
>>
>>
>> Good thing for them that there are no protocol police.
>
>
> Nobody expects the protocol police.
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 20 June 2014 19:20:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC