> Am 10.04.2019 um 14:07 schrieb Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
> <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com>:
>
>
>
>
> C2 General
>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com>
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. April 2019 14:04
>> An: httpd-dev <dev@httpd.apache.org>
>> Betreff: Re: keep-alive and vary in 304 responses
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:03 PM Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
>> <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>> Von: Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com>
>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. April 2019 12:49
>>>>
>>>> Do user-agents support "Transfer-Encoding: gzip, chunked" currently?
>>>> That'd be the best/easier solution I think.
>>>
>>> But TE is only hop-by-hop isn't it?. This would mean no e2e
>> compression?
>>
>> A proxy can still forward hop-by-hop things, e.g. mod_proxy forwards
>> "chunked" encoding if no previous handler/input-filter reads the body.
>
> My understanding was that mod_proxy "dechunks" the body and "chunks" it again.
> It does not pass it transparently.
> This would be a resource intensive job with compression.
I believe that a proxy could de-chunk without removing the gzip.
But how would our output filter infrastructure treat that? mod_deflate
stays inactive when faced with an existing Content-Encoding, but does not
watch out for Transfer-Encodings already applied. No resource type output
filter does, right?
Interesting topic.
- Stefan
