Re: WGLC comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-encryption-encoding-03, was: Encryption content coding simplification from Martin Thomson on 2016-10-14 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from October to December 2016)

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 11:01:43 +1100
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUYfvJWqcyT5VAVnsZr-aB9R+vR=HRT7cvjmtLFNWnz-Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 14 October 2016 at 05:09, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> ...and SDCH will also need a way to send compression related parameters,
> right?

...unless they are carried in the body.  Encryption is kinda weird in
the sense that the content is intentionally not able to be decoded by
every receiver.  Whereas most other content-encodings don't have that
constraint.  As a general notion, they benefit from being decoded
standalone.  (Yes, I believe that SDCH has header fields, but my
conjecture is that it shouldn't.)

Received on Friday, 14 October 2016 00:02:11 UTC