Re: Support for gzip at the server #424 (Consensus Call)

On 17 March 2014 22:53, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote:
> Is it worth proposing gzip as default Transfer-Encoding instead so its
> only done on DATA frames between hops known to be HTTP/2 at both ends?
> (ie after SETTINGS already confirms or breaks the connection).

I don't think that requiring compression is a good idea.  I can't
think of a security issue right now, but I don't want to force that on
people.

(...assuming you mean to say Content-Encoding).

Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 16:36:46 UTC