[Standards] certification etc.

Robin Redeker elmex at x-paste.de
Wed Mar 28 09:24:19 UTC 2007

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 01:41:02PM -0700, Rachel Blackman wrote:
> >Well stream compression isn't practical for some (otherwise  
> >intermediate-compliant) clients running in constrained  
> >environments. For example, Flash clients. So, if stream compression  
> >was added to the requirements, there would probably need to be an  
> >exception for constrained clients.
> I think stream compression should only be a required element on the  
> server side, honestly, for the sake of clients that can't do  
> encryption and are bandwidth limited.  Clients in general are better  
> off doing TLS where available, rather than doing compressed  
> unencrypted streams.

Well, at least according to the RFC 3920 Clients which don't support
TLS are already tapping into a gray area with regard to compliance.
Will clients be compliant if they don't support SHOULDs from the
RFC3920 (and RFC3921)?


More information about the Standards mailing list