On Sunday, May 5, 2002, at 11:25 AM, 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 It is legal, but not advisable. It is not better to use chunking than it is to use C-L. C-L works better with HTTP/1.0 downstream and allows progress bars to exist on big downloads. Any filter that does not transform the content should not modify the C-L. ....Roy
