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

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 07:23:17 +0200
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9b46d708-39d6-e905-6fec-1ee6370fb3a8@gmx.de>

On 2016-10-14 02:01, Martin Thomson wrote:
> 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.)

Good point.

Received on Friday, 14 October 2016 05:24:03 UTC