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

Re: h2#404 requiring gzip and/or deflate

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:50:46 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNdVo5T_gWXKc0Bv7DKv4FwE77zkJE2SrBBp_UaGVwY4aw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
The thinking when we put it into SPDY was that if you do gzip, you've
effectively required a deflate implementation, so one may as well allow it.

In the end, I'm ambivalent so long as there is a reasonable payload
compression requirement.
On Feb 21, 2014 9:44 AM, "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 21 February 2014 09:38, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No. Reverting to solely identity would be a huge step backwards.
> That's what I thought.  Which would you prefer gzip + deflate or just gzip?
Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 17:51:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:24 UTC