Re: Support for gzip at the server #424

Correct. But IIUC, the problem is the client doesn't know if there's a 1.0
intermediary or backend in the path, or if the 2.0 gateway is willing to
buffer (sounds crazy, but just for completeness I mentioned it). So the
client can't assume gzip support at the peer, even though we suspect most
would support it. Since we can't assume by default, I was thinking maybe we
can assume by having the server/proxy explicitly declare support.


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote:

> On 15/03/2014 11:04 a.m., William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:
> > It's unfortunate, but I agree that given the interop issues, I don't
> think
> > we can require this.
> >
> > I haven't thought about it deeply, but perhaps we can opt-in using the
> > SETTINGS and HTTP2-Settings headers. Explicit server declaration of
> > support. I haven't gamed it out completely in my head yet as to whether
> or
> > not that would create other obstacles and whether or not it's better than
> > application specific knowledge (e.g. JS shipped from server to client).
>
> The issue is mainly (only?) in 2.0->1.0 gateways, and only in that one
> direction. Solving it in the 2.0<->2.0 or 1.x->2.0 cases does not seem
> to be any benefit.
>
> Amos
>
>
>