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

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