Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 08:03:24PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote: > >>I understand the Content Length filter is responsible for sorting out >>Content-Length, and that chunked encoding will be enabled should the >>length be uncalculate-able, so it works as it is - but the question is, >>if we already have a content-length, should we not just keep it? > > > Nah, this allows us flexibility in optimizing the data sent to our > client. If we can send chunked-encoding, I believe that is a better > than using C-L. I believe that the RFC allows us to do these sorts > of optimizations. > > IIRC, the PR wasn't saying there was a problem with our approach - it > was just that the admin didn't understand that was legal. -- justin
Woh... Take this with the usual "I'm no expert in this" preface, but this doesn't seem right. Just to start, what about HTTP/1.0 clients? Even for HTTP/1.1 clients, it seems chunked encoding should only be used when necessary. Chunked encoding is extra overhead, and removes information that may be valuable down-the-line. We don't send chunked encoding for ordinary static content when we are the origin server, do we? Joshua.
