- From: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 08:08:24 -0500
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOdDvNpz+L=Nu_4Sp++vgiArxBPLBr9OkiKpzGz97ZYX=VT8pw@mail.gmail.com>
I think what the http/2 text means to say is that an "Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate" request header is implicit in every request and the client needs to be able to process responses with those encodings. On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > The other aspect of this is that HTTP already says: > > > A request without an Accept-Encoding header field implies that the > > user agent has no preferences regarding content-codings. Although > > this allows the server to use any content-coding in a response, it > > does not imply that the user agent will be able to correctly process > > all encodings. > > > > A server tests whether a content-coding for a given representation is > > acceptable using these rules: > > > > 1. If no Accept-Encoding field is in the request, any content-coding > > is considered acceptable by the user agent. > > ... > > < > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-26#section-5.3.4 > > > > So, what the current text *really* says is that servers can ignore the > 'identity' content-encoding when it appears alone in the request. > > Cheers, > > > > On 21 Feb 2014, at 6:14 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Mark raises a point on which the spec is a little vague: > > > > https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/404 > > -- > > 9.3 GZip Content-Encoding says: > > > > Clients MUST support gzip compression for HTTP request bodies. > > Regardless of the value of the accept-encoding header field, a server > > MAY send responses with gzip or deflate encoding. > > > > ... Is it both gzip and deflate (which last I checked, some clients > > don't support)? If so, the first sentence and section title should be > > changed to reflect this. > > -- > > > > I think that this is largely inherited from SPDY, but I get the sense > > that there is support for the concept in general. > > > > I want to clarify the text above... Do we want to mandate (i.e., use > > MUST) 1. gzip or 2. gzip+deflate ? > > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > >
Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 13:08:58 UTC