- From: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:46:46 -0600
- To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. If everybody can use either of the algorithms with ease, there's no point to mandate both. I also agree with Bjoern's point that gzip/deflate is pretty slow; enabling it may actually decrease throughput in a lot of deployments. Zhong Yu > > In the end, I'm ambivalent so long as there is a reasonable payload > compression requirement. > -=R > > 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 20:47:13 UTC