- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 15:59:07 -0500 (EST)
- To: "keith chapman" <keithgchapman@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Jonathan Marsh" <jonathan@wso2.com>, "Philippe Le Hegaret" <plh@w3.org>, "www-ws-desc" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
keith chapman said: > Hi, > > We do support Transfer-Encoding:chunked. When a message is gziped it has > to > be a chunked message. ... unless you close the connection at the end of the message, in which case, you don't need to use chunked. > Which means if we use the Transfer-Encoding header > to indicate gzip, the same header has got to indicate chunked too. I > tried > this combination with tomcat at the server. The server understands the > message only if the headers are placed as following > > Transfer-Encoding: chunked > Transfer-Encoding: gzip I think this is incorrect: [[ When the "chunked" transfer-coding is used, it MUST be the last transfer-coding applied to the message-body. ]] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-latest.html#transfer.codings You can't apply chunked first, then gzip. > If we reverse the order it returns a 501. The same occurs if we use > "Transfer-Encoding: chunked,gzip " or "Transfer-Encoding: gzip,chunked ". The second one should work and is equivalent to: Tranfer-Encoding: gzip Transfer-Encoding: chunked > Taking this into account I'm still not sure which header we should be > using... > > What do u think Philippe I'm going to ask Yves Lafon to have a look at this, Philippe
Received on Saturday, 13 January 2007 20:59:13 UTC