[Http-crcsync] First contact with a crcsync server

[Gervase Markham]

On 08/07/09 21:54, Patrick McManus wrote:
> this kind of feature probing is what the OPTIONS method is explicitly
> meant to do. Perhaps that can be made to work?

One of the benefits of this technique is supposed to be speed. If we 
have to pre-flight everything with a preceding OPTIONS request, we are 
going to lose that.

Surely the client will be advertising crcsync support in the 
Accept-Encodings header? Then the server can send a normal response as a 
set of compressed blocks as a way of saying "I know you don't have a 
base for this, so the only benefit you'll get is the gzipping, but 
that's good, and I'm also showing you I support crcsync. Do send me 
crcsync-based headers in the future."

Would that work?

Gerv